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)
This isn’t the hill you want to die on. If they ask for your input, just say that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and shrug. Most people follow these things because they’re exciting in an otherwise unexciting life, not because they’re dedicating their lives to discovering alien life or invading area 51.
If they try to debate you, just say ok and smile. You’re not going to logic someone out of a position they didn’t logic themselves into.
If you’re feeling up to it, you could just tell them about the invisible dragon in your garage, or the teapot that’s currently orbiting the sun.
Perfect. Refuting unfounded beliefs isn’t worthwhile. Being honest, kind and interesting is about as much as we can do.
You’ve managed to outline how to do that perfectly. I recognise the jist from my time in the atheism areas of Reddit.