this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
120 points (95.5% liked)

Asklemmy

43414 readers
1199 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Two of my coworkers frequently mention shows like "Encounters" or "Ancient apocalypse" or whatever. I'm not the best at debating or forming arguments against these though I do feel strongly that bold claims require better evidence than a blurry photo and an eyewitness account. How do you all go about this?

Today I clumsily stumbled through conversation and said "I'll need some evidence" and was hit with "there's plenty of evidence in the episode 'Lights over Fukushima'". I didn't have an answer because I haven't watched it. I'm 99% sure that if I watch it it's gonna be dramatized, designed to scare/freak you out a little and consist of eyewitness accounts and blurry photos set to eerie music. But I'm afraid I just sound like a haughty know-it-all if I do assert this before watching.

These are good people and I want to remain on good terms and not come across as a cynical asshole.

(Sorry if language is too formal or stilted. Not my native tongue)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] SpaceAce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

Yeah. Also it's not my place to raise adults. But a part of me wishes to plant a seed of skepticism. I have a hard time nodding and going along with it. I feel compelled to question it rather than going along with this kind of small talk.

[โ€“] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 22 points 11 months ago

Your answer is right there. Plant seeds of doubt. Ask questions about it. Wow! Did they get footage?! Really? There must be two sources for such a wild thing to have happened! What does Snopes say? Lmfao

[โ€“] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

You don't have to convince them but you also don't have to listen either.

You just have to decide that any issues with cutting them off when they start talking about it is worth the effort or if it may cause problems at work.

[โ€“] SpaceAce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 11 months ago

I'll think on this. Thank you :)

[โ€“] Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz 4 points 11 months ago

I've watched some of the shows because they do actually lead to some interesting archeological digs I hadn't heard of before... However there's one thing that always nags me when watching this stuff -- why do they always think ancient humans were so stupid? It is believed that the human brain has not changed for around 100,000 years, which means that no matter how far back you go in our observable history, those people had the same capacity for rational thought as we do. Sure, we have a huge advantage through the knowledge of written history, but even a cave man had the same ability as we do to accomplish a task with the materials at hand.

You'll also note they always ask a modern engineer how they would accomplish tasks such as moving large stones, and the answer is always something like "I would use modern machinery" because of course we've come to rely on them and nobody today ever tries to think of any other way to perform the same task. How were the great pyramids built? They always claim it can't be done today, while conveniently ignoring all of the theories of how they did probably move those blocks.

So I guess my skepticism on those types of shows is that they intentionally leave out significant details to make everything sound more woo-woo (every big claim they make probably already has a wikipedia page providing legitimate answers or at least giving factual details). Sure there are some things that still aren't understood but just because you see some glowing lights doesn't immediately mean aliens are involved. Even though I do believe there is other life out there, I haven't seen any evidence yet on these shows that I would consider "proof" of visitations, but rather just a whole lot of "this is how we interpret the data to fit our conspiracy theory."