23
May

Defining HIGH SKEPTICISM: Don't be a High Skeptic! Arrival of The OS



full of grace among skeptics [Laughter] evening all I'm the omniscient skeptic [Laughter] we the skeptics are the superior race born and bred to lead the world oh my oh but my how many of you see I tried to kill principal you two can break free but what is high scepticism you say oh oh my princess of prattle I am glad to oblige your curiosity on what that is Oh hi skepticism is a term that I began using a couple months back much to the chagrin of those who receive the label you can't simply create a term they might say and yet that's precisely what language is a huge assortment of made-up terms that have come into common usage elephants don't exist but there is a large mammal with a long trunk and thunderous tramplings that we refer to with the word elephant elephant is simply the word that someone at some point in history used in reference to the animal that is now filling your minds with these images that word began to be used more and more by people until it was commonly accepted that this animal is in fact an elephant but I digress as I said I invented this term in order to be used in reference to the numerous problems that I found in the Atheist community it actually comes from a visualization that occurred when a certain skeptic said something that reminded me so much of something that a high elf might say in Dungeons & Dragons High Elves believed themselves to be superior to other elves and non elves for those that don't know anything about D&D I'm kind of a geek anyway in a conversation about platforming and D platforming one of the high skeptics stated and I quote lose not all were the comments struck me is beyond pompous and so the term high skeptic was born however before we get started I wanted to find what high skepticism is not and that it's not the trademark skeptics of a few years ago these people were far more overt in their hatred far more in your face with their bigotry and so these people don't fit what I'm defining as high skepticism high skeptics may share many similarities with the skeptic teams of a few years back but there is more of a subversive form of hate and undercover form of bigotry that shows itself in a much different fashion many of the talking points are the same but they've been washed of all overt bigotry and in sted flows in the waves of right-wing political correctness it's the Southern Strategy of YouTube skepticism if you will and so now it's time to define high skepticism number one question everything and pretend to accept nothing not backed in science older skeptics of the skeptics TM variety would have claimed a talking point as simply being bullshit they would rant and rave about the evils of social justice warriors and their outraged culture over time this behavior became passe it was recognized that the old-school skeptics had not eliminated any form of outraged culture and had instead created their own far more vitriolic and overt than any other outraged culture they had been fighting against one cannot mention the names of TJ Kirk Sargon shoe on head or armoured skeptic without their minds being filled with the outlandish and ridiculous claims that these and others have made throughout the years who will forget when armored skeptic and shoe on head laughed at gorilla jokes targeted towards an african-american woman who can forget Sargon claiming that he wouldn't even rape someone thinking of TJ Kirk brings to mind the time he spent terrorizing a young transgender kid who had done nothing more than speak their mind these people became known as the thing that they had claimed to be fighting against and so as the founders of high skepticism came together they wanted to make sure and distance themselves from this other group instead of claiming to know something as ridiculous or outrageous they obfuscated and will simply claim that the science is still out on the subject regardless of if this is actually true or not they'll claim they're only asking questions no matter how offensive or insensitive and when pushed will complain about the reaction that their question ads received these people will use a form of gas lighting on social media that allows them to appear to many as the one being victimized whenever their comments spark outrage one such method is to continually ask the same question numerous times over the course of several months acting as if this is the first time they've asked the question perhaps the answers have all been presented to them in every situation and so over a certain time period people have taken notice that they're engaging in the same conversation over and over again one of these people may choose to point this out and yet to the casual observer this will appear as an attack on someone who is simply asking a sincere question the upset person will be deemed as a problem will be highlighted for expressing even the slightest amount of outrage and then dog piled on by that person and anyone who holds the questioner in high esteem regardless of if the person asking the question is wrong in their line of questioning or assertions this brings me to point number two number two when in doubt deny the science in point one I mentioned that one common tactic of the high skeptic is to claim that the science is still out on the topic even if mountains of scientific research has been done on the topic and the science has been settled one such occasion of this can be shown in recent events that transpired on line between essence of thought and rationality rules rationality rules made a video claiming that trans women in sports are unfair he made numerous claims about the differences between system women and trans women while actually comparing sis women insists men essence of thought and response brought an incredibly well researched and sourced video pouring out all the ways that rationality rules had invaded the scientific research on the subject how he denied the existence of relevant studies into the topic and how rationality rules engaged in the logical fallacies that rationality rules claimed were being used by those in support of trans women in sports the reaction was almost immediate fans and sycophants alike of rationality rules latched hold to their favorite skeptic and claimed that essence of thought was nothing more than trying to star drama that they were wrong in their assertions and that they were simply lying of rationality rules in order to get him deemed as transphobic no matter how many times the source materials were pointed out those in support of rationality rules denied the science and instead continued to claim that the science was still out on the topic and that more studies needed to be done before we decide on the subject yet something more sinister occurred from this interaction and that's point number three number three wait for the call and then attack in reference to the above video many skeptics decided that this was the point in which they could show their true colors the vast majority would attempt to use this first point initially but over time their attacks became more and more vicious exposing the bigotry in a plethora of ways choosing this time to speak out on their hatred of gender-neutral pronouns misgendering folks along the way and showing the true face of high skepticism remember how I said that high skepticism is comparable to the skeptic teams of the past well even though I consider these as two distinct groups the hate the anger the bigotry of both groups are equitable and they only present themselves in different fashions the general method that high skeptics employ is to wait for someone with a decent amount of respect in the community to make a claim whether that be rationality rules sam harris seth andrews or any other skeptic and then they double down on it making even more radical claims as they go along some might claim this is cowardly but i'd like to claim that it's simply strategy wait for a prominent person to make a claim and then most of the ire will be focused on that person while you're capable of spreading your hatred in the comments unchallenged by many number four there is no god but Hitchens and Harris and Dawkins are his prophets the New Atheists had a lot to say about religion and in many cases they were correct religion can be oppressive it can be harmful and it can prevent many people from living there lives as they see fit in some forms religion has held back gay rights trans rights women's rights and civil rights in this form in a stifled society's progress and has been a great detriment to the practitioners of that faith as well as those outside of it however has religion poisoned everything is God belief a delusion our groups like feminists and black lives matter harming our society in a way that it's equitable to young Earth Creationism the answer to all of those questions is no God belief alone is not a delusion religion is quite obviously incapable of poisoning everything feminists and black life matter are groups that have formed to combat against inequalities in our society not tear it apart and yet these claims and many more have been made by the fathers of New Atheism yet to question these claims is heretical in the minds of the high skeptics no matter how many times Sam Harris makes bigoted remarks against Muslims laughs along to the transphobic rants of Douglas Murray or retweets defense of Sargon Heights or anti LGBTQ groups the high skeptics will jump in to defend him you can't even question Hitchens lack of integrity in his writing never including a single footnote in his seminal classic God is not great it's wrong of us to question the message that Dawkins and others send out when they claim to be proud Islamophobes even in the wake of a brutal terrorist attack committed by one such as Lama phobic person though the high skeptics will outright disavow Amin reverential status to these men it's incredibly clear to the outside observer that these men are Saints and Hitchens as close to a God as could come from a naturalistic ideology dare to speak out in criticism of these and see if the high skeptics don't react to you in a way that is similar to any religious person defending their Creed's their gods or their dogma these men are not alone in their reverence others such as the PETA of atheist charities atheist Republic are held in a place of esteem this shitposting social media account that attempts to portray itself as a serious charity takes part in some of the worst attacks on basic human decency yet they're almost never called out by prominent skeptics especially those in the high skeptic crowd the problem here is that these people run contrary to the stated goals of many skeptics to lead to a more secular and less religious society the actions by these men in groups do not increase the respect or lead to the acceptance of atheists in society they actually lead to the entrenchment of the religious and the continued belief that atheists are nothing more than a group of angry disrespectful white men if your goal is to change the way that society looks at atheists then rooting yourself and the camps of these people is not going to do it number 5 love the believer hate the religion if there is something that the vast majority of skeptics will agree upon is that the quote love the sinner hate the sin is nothing more than a meaningless platitude it's something that the bigoted believer will say in an effort to make them appear as if they're less bigoted well the same can be said towards many of the high skeptics who proclaim themselves to be anti theist now I want to be clear there are many anti theist who see religion as a net negative on the world but don't go about partaking in the type of behavior that I will be speaking of shortly if you want a good example of the type of person who is legitimately an anti theist and legitimately not a bigoted person look no further than godless cranium he attacks ideas with precision and almost effortlessly steers clear of attacking the person or the culture that that person exists within however there are skeptics that choose to claim love the believer hate the religion while also going above and beyond to attack both the believers and their culture they are decidedly anti theist in being against the theists and never failed to spout their bigoted views whenever a theists dare say anything about their faith online at all on top of this they tend to be really bad at it as well instead of striving to learn anything about the believer before it's hacking their faith they treat all believers as if they are one in the same my polytheists friends and subscribers will no doubt be able to tell you how many times they've been treated as if they belong to Christianity or Islam by someone that has no interest in understanding or even accepting the differences between monotheism and polytheism another example of this can be seen in the recent announcement that CBS Studios may be dropping CBS religion coverage this move has been deemed as a win by many in the high skeptic community without ever taking a minutes time to research the topic and realize that CB s religion was actively investigating evangelical churches exposing abuses occurring there and in other realms of religious faith and was not a part of CBS that was promoting religion they simply saw that religion was being dropped by a major TV studio and decided that this was a positive even when the facts of this were pointed out the high skeptics then claimed that anyone who would want to be willing to support CBS religion must undoubtedly be a theist which is humorous if it weren't so damn sad the lack of interest in learning about other people's cultures faiths and practices before vitriolic ly attacking them is a deep concern to me as it harkens back to my time in a fundamentalist faith where everything outside the walls of my own faith were deemed as wicked evil and wrong we didn't need to know what atheists believed we simply knew that they were wicked because they weren't part of our congregation we knew nothing about Islam Hinduism polytheism or any other faiths but these were all deemed as sinful behaviors because they didn't except our chosen faith the lifestyles of lgbtq+ individuals were seen as an abomination even though none of us regularly interacted with any of these people so it should come as no shock the despised I feel when these types of behaviors are exhibited by folks claiming to be proponents of both logic and reason conclusion the high skeptics are a dangerous brand of atheist / agnostic thinkers who believe that science is the answer to everything yet will only accept science that supports their own claims their bigoted towards a wide variety in the same fashion as the former skeptics TM crowd but are far less overt with their hate the high skeptics claim to simply be questioning everything while at the same time trying to promote that they accept nothing that hasn't been scientifically verified many of these skeptics wait for the moment that a prominent person speaks out before allowing their true colors to be shown they hold the Four Horsemen of new atheism and others in reverential spots that would be filled by gods or spirits in religion and lastly they will pretend to simply be attacking the ideas of faith while in reality they're espousing their bigoted views towards the people and the culture high skepticism is a religious dogma for those that like to pretend that they hold no dogmatic views whatsoever it's a detriment to skeptics and atheists who actually want to push our society forward and aren't simply trying to up their edge Lorde game for subscribers or followers they promote a style of belief that in my opinion is just as harmful as young Earth Creationism or flat earth beliefs be a skeptic but don't be a high skeptic the high skeptics are high only in the fact that they believe in and support their own ego and brand more than any other idea or ideology oh so you see skeptics come I hope you've learned unabashedly on the civil union of skepticism and bigotry otherwise known as high skepticism Oh i the great OLS the omniscient skeptic broke free and so can you or can the omniscient skeptic here's what you say and see what you type and I know what you feel accepting all that you don't actually know is offense except other humans of were these beings are simple human hi skepticism can drive you mad my you

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

16 Comments

  • Objectively Subjective says:

    Hello all! The Omniscient Skeptic Here, I hope you enjoyed this video and will be sure to try and escape the icy grip of high skepticism. Be a Skeptic, but never be a High Skeptic!

  • Bad Noise bebop Blackout Network says:

    EssenceofThought sends their thanks

  • BMillzebub says:

    I dig the video but the way you started and ended it definitely wasn't creepy as fuck.

  • Rana King says:

    My $0.02 watching a number of atheist content channels is that they got high on the success of critical debunking of really bad apologetics from the likes of G Man, Nephy, SJ, Kent Hovind, et al. (and really how hard is that?). I think that went to some heads and then they got over-confident of their abilities to then debunk far more complex topics requiring a lot more research and scientific background.

  • 2AHD Cat says:

    Hey Maddie. I left a comment here and… it's gone. I'm confused

  • rat says:

    peter boghossian's ears must burn every time someone watches this video!

  • Conquering Thought says:

    You made many good points but it was all undercut by my intense hatred of clowns. Must dislike for triggering my phobia…

    (Jk… but seriously phobia too stronk)

  • Pure Ostension says:

    I was ready to open over 9000 tabs…

  • bicyclelegs says:

    I know videos like this are a shit-ton of work, but I look forward to more. This is probably the best thing you’ve put out so far. Bravo!

  • Greg Hartwick says:

    Wow! This is amazing stuff! I’ve seen some of this but some of it is new to me. I need to examine this further. I’ll start by watching the video again and perhaps again. Thanks Maddie.

  • Cathy Drolet says:

    I've listened 3 times and I still don't understand what King Crockoduck is supposed to be saying. I listened twice before I could figure out any of what the screechy voice in the first 2 mins was saying. Maybe a transcript?

  • Rusty Walker says:

    I'm having to listen to this twice to make sure it goes in.

  • Neil Stone says:

    Many of the anti-theists I have seen that do this were once religious so they believe all religion and all forms of theism are bad.

  • Neil Stone says:

    I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure TJ has apologized for his attack on Milo

  • Missus Snarky says:

    🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

  • Dr fred dave says:

    excellent stuff

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *