Debunking Korff

Couple of days ago I watched this vid again where Kal Korff claims he's not a debunker or a skeptic, instead he claims to be a researcher. I beg to differ. Simply stating something doesn't make it so. In Korff's case it's not unusual to come to the conclusion that he is in fact a debunker. Why? You simply look at the results of his actions. Korff claims to be a researcher but to my knowledge every conclusion he makes, given a UFO case, is one of denial and that makes him a debunker, and not an objective researcher.
For the life of me I can't recall Kal Korff speaking in a positive manner about a UFO case. I might be mistaken but I simply haven't seen a positive remark or conclusion, period. According to Korff, Kenneth Arnold saw meteorites. The Phoenix lights were flares deployed by the Air Force. Nothing going on at Area 51. Nothing going on with Roswell. In other paranormal areas such as Bigfoot and conspiracy theories such as the assassination of JFK, Korff also claims nothing out of the ordinary transpired. Those kind of conclusions and the way he approaches these subjects put him in the category of a debunker, in my opinion

Korff is quite fond off using the dictionary when it comes to being called a debunker. Strangely enough he doesn't like to be called one and uses the dictionary in his defense. I find it strange that Korff doesn't come out of the closet on this, anyway, here's the definition of a debunker straight out of the dictionary;
de⋅bunk
–verb (used with object)
to expose or excoriate (a claim, assertion, sentiment, etc.) as being pretentious, false, or exaggerated: to debunk advertising slogans.

While debunking means you take the bunk out of a claim, it doesn't automatically imply the person doing the debunking is right. And this is where Korff beats around the bush. A person can also debunk out of his or her convictions. That's where the ufological interpretation of a debunker stems from, a person who debunks UFOs no matter what information is layed in front of them. Looking at Korff's actions and conclusions he seems to fit right in the ufological interpretation.
Setting the standard where it suits you also exposes a debunker, or in other words a biased 'researcher'. Korff has done this many times. In the Phoenix Lights he ignored many testimonies where people claimed they saw a huge craft. Roswell testimonies are denied as impaired memories yet in the Bigfoot case eyewitness testimonies of people who claimed to have worn a gorilla-suit some 30 - 40 years ago (with no physical evidence) are endorsed.
A debunker uses that which helps their point, and disregards elements that doesn't support his or her preconcieved notions. You only have to look at the methodology, and in my opinion that clearly points to Kal Korff being a debunker.