LilWabbit
Senior Member
I know you weren't presenting it as scientific proof of anything. I'm bringing attention to it as a psychological disposition we can all fall prey to without even noticing it's happening so we can maybe become more aware of it in ourselves when it does happen.
If I were to start interpreting the behavior of a person in the least charitable light possible on a consistent basis it'd be helpful for someone to point it out to me as well.
Except that I haven't interpreted anyone's person, including Grusch's, anywhere near the "least charitable light possible", which is rather your consistent misreading of what I've been suggesting. I've been consistent in accepting his sincerity for the most part. You mischaracterize and caricaturize my words, and then respond to your own mischaracterizations. Whilst in fact you appear to be the one assuming a derogatory attitude behind every skeptics' term intended as descriptive due to your own seeming bias towards the 'condescending skeptic'. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's how it comes across.
Your argument and epistemological premise seems to also exhibit false balance a.k.a bothsidesism whilst thinking it's a measure of impartiality as opposed to the 'skeptic' on one side and the 'ufologist' on the other.
Article: False balance, also bothsidesism, is a media bias in which journalists present an issue as being more balanced between opposing viewpoints than the evidence supports.