Sorry about the first post right these, I screwed up. Anyway, posted below are some of my, now called, “The Debunker’s Law of…” I was inspired to write these as a result of these threads that were posted on JREF:
Rules of Woohttp://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=143506
The operative laws of psuedo-sciencehttp://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=73251
The woo woo credohttp://www.insolitology.com/tests/credo.htm
Skeptico - The woo handbookhttp://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2007
I am very disgusted and disappointed by the woo bashing the do so I figure that turnabout is fair play. They don’t like these at all, but I say, If they can’t take a joke, nuke ‘em.”The Law of Blind Faith
: A state of mind wherein people's need to believe in something outweighs their need to know the truth. Law of Insistent Impartiality
- will always preface and/or qualify before and during that they "only want to find the truth" This is a way of showing how open minded they are and what seekers of the truth they are. They will always insist that they are open minded, objective, logical, impartial. Omnicient Absolute
– Their perspective and opinions are All knowing and All Seeing and beyond reproach. Anybody that’s “right thinking” will see that as self-evident. Any differing opinion is therefore totally wrong (see Black and White/All-or-Nothing thinking)Debunker’s Law of “Close Enough for Rock ‘n Roll”
– to debunk something, all you’ve got to do is come up with what appears to be the same thing and In the debunker’s mind a magician’s trick that mimics the phenomena is good as gold.
Law of Ocaam’s Sledge Hammer – the simplest solution is not usually the best, it is always the best…no matter whatLaw of the “Official Story”
(aka. Safe refuge in a harbor) – The Official Story is always right. I’ts true because it’s true/if it’s true it can’t be false. If the OS says it was a weather balloon, then it was; proof positive, case closed. No question, no doubt, total acceptance. This is similar to an Appeal to Authority, but in their case they say it isn’t, because if it’s true, then it can’t be an Appeal to Authority because the OS is impeccable and beyond reproach. Law of the Implausible Plausible
– 1.) Trying to make something fit where it doesn’t fit. Every explanation MUST be a plausible and mundane one, even when it doesn’t fit.
2.) It is better to be mundane and wrong than to be complex and right.
(See Ocamm’s Beard – the simplest solution isn’t always the right one)Law of Immaculate Perception
– they are the only ones who see reality exactly as it is unhindered by any cognitive biases. So therefore, to disagree with them is to disagree with reality itself. Law of Mutual Validation
– is achieved by JREFing each other off…(sorry, I had to say it.) (smiley face goes here)Law of Predetermined Intolerance
– Anybody who disagrees with them is wrong even before they made an assertion and therefore, anything they say will not be tolerated. Law of Repetitive Verbalization
- Use the words "plausible and mundane" as often as possibleThe Black Bart Law
– vilification of all members of “them" however that is defined, contrasted with the near-deification of anyone that is “us”, however that is defined.Law of Contemptio Prepositus Inquiro
- (contempt prior to investigation) Also known as the Law of Investigative Absence”. (Similar to Law of Predetermined Intolerance). Their minds are already made up so there is no need to do their own independent investigation. Law of Perpetual Simplicity
– a bastardized version of Occam’s Razor, which, while not stated outright, is implied throughout, that the simplest explanation is the ONLY explanation. The mindset of ALL explanations must be mundane at all costs, no matter what the cost. Law of Specific Credentials
- Expertise in one field automatically grants expertise in another unrelated field. For example, anything Randi debunks is righteous even though he is a stage magician. The Law of Woo by Association
- Any assertion is to be disbelieved regardless of the validity of the data or the veracity of the witness making the assertion. A debunker automatically puts them in the 'woo' category. For example, an expert military, commercial pilot must be disbelieved if they are asserting a UFO encounter. Why? Because it is a self evident truth that UFOs don’t exist because no physical evidence in the form of pieces of the craft have been found, therefore, it doesn’t matter who is making the claim, they are wrong, period.Law of Predetermined Dismissal
- Simply characterizing the study of unorthodox phenomena as "bogus" allows the Pseudo to state emphatically that there is nothing there to study without even looking at the data.Law of the amateur astronomer
- the assertion that amateur astronomers, are "trained observers" and therefore, their word trumps that of police officers, pilots, air controllers, or virtually anybody else reporting a sighting, as totally unqualified to verify anything they see. (special thanks to Phil Plait, the Bad Astronomer)Law of Open Mindedness
- Always claim that the other guy is deluded, misinformed, crazy, etc. and that you're as free-thinking and open minded as a newborn baby.
Debunker’s Law of the Magical Magician - Engage the services of a professional stage magician who can mimic the phenomenon in question; for example, ESP, The Unicorn gambit:
If asked a question like, “Do you think, believe or know that all UFO sightings past, present and future, are all mundane, plausible explanations?” They will sarcastically say something to this effect: “Sure there might be a chance, about as much of a chance of Unicorns and Faries. This is nothing more than a way of sarcastically saying no without have to bear the burden of proof and maintain the semblance of objectivity.
Also, Just for fun, I am going to include a partial list of a typical ‘debunker’s’ psychological traits that I have noticed time and again:A belief that:
since a thing could be faked, it must be faked
Whatever is claimed is…something else
Belief that all UFO photos are fake, especially the real ones
Absence of proof is proof of absence
I am a debunker, therefore, I’m always right. I’m always right because I’m a debunker.
Skeptism is the beginning of rational thinking
Psuedoskeptism if the end of rational thinkingHero of the World
- They are part of special, elite group who are the only ones that can save the ignorant and the superstitious from their misguided ways. They’re on a mission from DarwinI’m Special Effect
- Debunkers think they are special for seeing reality as it really is. Their goal is to convert the teeming ignorant, superstitious masses.Patron Saint effect
– (sometimes known as the Emmisary of Light syndrome) The belief that they know what is best for everyone else even if we don’t. Therefore, it is their Darwin given duty to spread this Enlightment to the teeming masses and gently and patiently lead them into the light. Similar in nature to a parent/child dynamic but laced with condescend. Illusory superiority
– perception of self as a person of elevated intelligence, keener insight, of someone who has transcended the shackles of naïve, superstitious thinking which allows them to perceive reality as it actually is unhindered by superstitious thinking and unfettered by cognitive biases like the rest of humanity. As in the case of most fundamentalist mindsets, this is to the point of outright grandiosity. This is always reinforced by fellow debunkers and creates the ‘I’m special’ and different effect’.Warriors for Truth, Justice and the Scientific Way
- It’s believing that you are warrior against the darkness of ignorance and superstitious thought. The belief that they are they are special or elite for being one of the few who were able to find their way through the darkness and into the ‘Light’. This gives them a feeling of being elevated and better than others.Messianic Complex
-that they are the enlightened ones, that they are charged with the burden of defending sense against nonsense, that they alone can be counted on to stand their ground against the rising tide of irrationalism that threatens to engulf our civilization and undo all the gains that have been wrought in the name of Science. Even scientists themselves, it turns out, are no match for the diabolical paranormalists. Only skeptics, educated by James “Amazing” Randi and other magicians, are capable of spotting the tricks of the trade. “Scientists are easily fooled,” explained Randi, “because they think they know.” But only skeptics really know.
Long post, but to me, that is what this forum is all about: Debunking the Debunkers. Any feedback, good or bad, is welcomed