I had a suggestion for an episode that I thought I would throw out there. I think it would be good to 'get back to the roots' of paranormal investigations, which is the actual witness/client/experiencer (depending on how you view them.) It's the people that experience or witness the phenomena that really drive this field, whether it's ghost or UFO or odd creature. Without someone who witnesses these events, we have nothing. It's these people that we point to when the skeptics say nothing's going on, or that people are just seeing Venus.

I propose screening a few willing participants, maybe four or five, who have had genuine paranormal experiences and bring them on the show, then have a few cohosts conduct an interview of these participants based on what they saw. I'd say the screening process should involve a set of criteria along the lines of daytime experiences, say, that last more than a full minute and, preferably, are multi-witness. Get maybe Paul Kimball or Chris o'Brien (sure, I have my problems with either one them, but respect them as interviewers/researchers) to conduct the interview and show how they would do such a thing. I'd also say that the witnesses chosen shouldn't be people "in the field", people who are not in the paranormal entertainment world and such. The best witnesses are simple Joe's not involved in paranormal research themselves.

Thoughts?

Great guest, interesting show. He's way to credulous for my taste but he was honest in answering my question, which was appreciated.
Nick did a great job as co-host.
I guess the lack of comments about this episode mean that he really didn't bother anyone.

Am I right people? Nick's new book is out and it looks like another winner. Ok, so it's his 148th book and number 27 this year, but I've never even heard of "the Collins Elite."

Hi Chris. Just wanted to say, you have been doing an outstanding job as co-host and bringing in some fantastic guests .
Gene lucked out, having you on board. Hope you continue with the wonderful Mr Steinberg for many many, moons to come.

Well, guess I'll go ahead and start it off. First of all, Ray is an excellent storyteller. He really knows how to draw you in and describes things in such a way that you almost feel like you're there. Because he's so good at it this is the first episode since the new format got going that the frequent commercials were really bugging me.

It's unfortunate that he is so protective of much of his data. Been trying to speculate why and the only thing I can come up with is that he desires recognition and maybe he feels that if it were on the internet it would become the public's data and somehow he'd be cut out of the loop. I don't know, just guessing. But I wouldn't hold my breath that suddenly a bunch of scientists are going to show up to look at it, especially since it's so old. I'm thinking that most would probably assume that if it's half as fantastic as he says it is they would have seen it decades ago. Here's hoping that what he has is as good as he says it is. He sure does an excellent job talking about it. Wouldn't it be a trip if all this time many of the best UFO images ever filmed have been locked up in some cranky guy's house? But he sounds so protective of it that I'm not very confident I'm ever going to get to see much of it. And if I never get to see it evaluating what I've heard is difficult other than to say it sounds fascinating. But it was good that you got him to agree to release a few things.

He's certainly a very interesting guest, a great storyteller (I can't emphasize that enough. He's one of those guys that you can ask a single question and he could go on for hours if you didn't stop him. Those types are always good at spinnin' a yarn) and I really liked the show.

And I want to say ahead of time that anyone who tries saying that the questions weren't tough enough are flippin' nuts.

I've been struggling to work through the paracast back catalog, and listened to the Scott Littleton interview from 2008 just the other day, in which he talked about being an eyewitness to the "Battle of LA". One thing he pointed out was how the object was moving very slowly, and yet the anti-aircraft guns were unable to do any apparent damage to it. There was a general feeling afterward that the gunners defending LA could not shoot straight.

Coincidentally, I watched the Speilberg move "1941" the next day. That movie is very obviously inspired by the Battle of LA, but rather than being about UFOs, it is about the incompetency of the military that was supposed to protect the city. The film even includes scenes of anti-aircraft shells attempting to hit an airplane (and missing), and even goes so far as to have TWO airplanes go down on the streets of LA, just like was reported the day after the battle of LA.

I thought it was interesting that Littleton also mentioned the Japanese sub that had shelled onshore targets and sank a boat off of Santa Monica. The movie also includes a Japanese sub off the coast of Santa Monica.

It seems like there were only two explanations for the Battle of LA-- either there was indeed a craft that was impervious to shell fire, OR the military was totally incompetent. Isn't it funny that Spielberg of all people choose the latter explanation for his film!

I don't know how he could have made a move like that in this day & age-- we aren't allowed to poke fun at the "Greatest Generation" anymore! It would be easier to say it was a real UFO than to say the soldiers who saved the world from Fascism were nincompoops!

ps. I found this great photo analysis of the LA Times picture, and they apparently found a "lozenge-shaped" craft in the midst of the smoke & shellfire: http://www.rense.com/general67/batofla.htm

We're hot not he trail of new original four-color designs for our T-shirts and other logo-based merchandise. We'll even consider a new logo if you can develop something compelling and, yes, sexy.

So folks, are you willing to participate.

Please contact me via PM if you want to get involved.

The winner (or winners) will get full credit for their designs, free promotional ads for their businesses if need be, and we're working on yet another prize even more attractive.

So let's get started!

Hi All,

I've noticed the odd email telling me the Paracast Forums miss me, I've never actually posted a comment since I joined a few months ago, but I'm going to start right now.

As this is my first post I'll add it to this 'About the Show Section'.

Let me start by just bigging up the Paracast, it's by far the best podcast available out there, I download it weekly and listen to it on my early morning runs, nothing better than running through corn fields at 5:30am listening to this stuff.

I've noticed some criticism lately on the forums about the extra commercials. I'm from the UK and believe me these commercials are prime time entertainment, I mean natural disasters, gun holsters, storing seed DNA, what the hell is going on over there. Seriously though they are little annoyance for such a great FREE show!!!

I'll end on my plus and minuses, My fav all time shows are the Mac Tonies interviews. I'm sure Mac would have solved the whole thing eventually had he still been with us, such a brilliant guy.

Does nick pope have to say 'after 21 years in the Government' 21 times an hour?

All the above has probably already been said but hey just Keep up the great work!

Cheers

Kev - (9 years in government)

Just listened to the Louis Jarvis interview and was . . . somewhat frustrated. Thought I would pop in and give the reasons why but then realized I might broaden my comments to include other guests and why they were thumbs up or down in my book.


Louis Jarvis . . . where to begin. First of all, I like the guy and I respect his devotion to his spiritual beliefs. He expects miracles to happen (Garabandal) and, who knows, maybe they will. Louis is sort of in his own little world, a world where he has all the answers (and each one is at least ten minutes long). He's knows exactly what the third secret of Fatima is. He knows exactly what technology the Socorro UFO used. He knows for a fact that George Noory is a CIA puppet. He knows that the ETs are tracking Ray Stanford 24/7. He tends to ramble and ramble and, while Chris gobbles it up, it can sometimes drive me to distraction.


Many of you have probably heard Dr. Fred Bell on Coast-to-Coast. He also knows everything in the world and will spew out 1,001 facts in five minutes if you ask him a question. Most times, though, he won't get around to actually answering your question. Steven Greer—same thing. He's "vectored-in" the flying saucers, he's dined with a former CIA director and he has all the answers. But he just can't seem to answer any specific question in under five minutes.


Well now, you don't really have a conversation with these folks, do you? When did Jarvis give a brief, coherent answer to any question that was posed to him? Maybe once? For these three guys, a question posed to them is just an opportunity to make a long-winded speech—one that frequently meanders far off topic. Would you invite any of these guys over for dinner? Well, maybe Jarvis. The trouble is, all three tend to deliver speeches instead of putting their feet up, relaxing and engaging in two-way conversation.


Luckily, many skilled conversationalists have appeared on the Paracast stage this year and that's why I keep coming back. In fact, our leader Stein Geneberg has a real talent, I think, for finding guests who don't disappoint. He's also the behind-the-scenes master of making the Paracast a viable commercial product that won't disappear anytime soon. Major kudos for that effort.


Who are my favorite talkers? We've heard so many pros it's hard to single a few out, but here goes: Budd Hopkins, Nick Redfern, Paul Davids, Ted Phillips, David Childress, Rich Dolan and Leslie Kean. I also agree with Chris that there's another lady who deserves more credit and attention for her work, and that would be Linda Howe. There's a reason this workaholic won an Emmy and has a phenomenal number of daily hits on her website. She's very good at what she does and is currently unraveling the Bentwaters case better than anyone ever has. I hope Gene will invite Linda to the Paracast microphone and I hope she will accept.


One final thought. Louis Jarvis is a serious intellectual with much to tell, much to teach. He reminds me a little of Walter Starcke (Aug. 2009). It's incumbent on the interviewer to seriously dig in and carefully interrogate a thinker like this. That means interrupting him when necessary and asking for explanations and clarifications. If you listen carefully you'll hear Gene doing exactly that. I'd have Jarvis back on the Paracast sometime because he has a lot to say and practice makes perfect.

After working with the GCN engineers, I've been able to greatly improve the audio quality of the archived episodes.

Beginning with our August 22nd episode, you'll get a full 64-kilobit audio file. The file size will be twice as large, but it will sound much better.

Hope you like the improvement. The first upgraded file is now available!

This gets my vote as, by far, the worst show yet.

I would have never imagined that the network ads would seem an island of normalcy compared to the relentlessly implausible and insanely disorganized material presented in this show.

Maybe this is the kind of stuff that people love?

I do know at least one person seemed to be eating it all up.

Maybe it's just me. Since I am a skeptic in the pay of the skeptical cabal, maybe I am just diabolically trying to convince folks here that the guest's presentation wasn't impeccably referenced and carefully argued.

I am sure that you can decide for yourselves but I do detect (in certain shows) a sea change in the way the Paracast differentiated itself from the other shows of this genre.

Or were the angels always there and I just forgot em?

Lance

This article just appeared in Radio Business Report, and it's designed to sell the two radio shows to regular radio stations:

Radio Business Report/Television Business Report - Voice of the Broadcasting Industry

I can't remember exactly how I got there via this website, but I have just completed the Posdcast survey for The Paracast. I hope my data is helpful in building up your listeners' and website visitors' profile.

Anyway, question 16: "What do you like least about this [The Paracast] show?" I hope the forum is a reasonable place to copy my reply to this question, particularly about the more probing questioning of guests. I know the team don't want to scare them off, but sometimes I (and presumably other listeners) want more supporting evidence dragged out of them. I think Gene recently said it would reduce the time guests have to cover their subject more widely, and also implausible statements might as well be left hanging there as just implausible...

(Regarding the ads, I see from the forum no selection is possible - a pity.)

Q16: What do you like least about this [The Paracast] show?

The appalling "Buy this stuff now or you and your family may DIE!" type ads. OK, you need commercials, but PLEASE keep to the respectable ones. Don't you have "Truthful, Honest, Decent" regulations in the USA for commercials?

Some guests should be subjected to much more vigorous questioning - it doesn't have to be hostile, but if that's how it turns - too bad. We need more: "Where did you get that info?" "Will a proper lab test this hair/soil/etc. sample?" "What evidence to have for that?" "When will these breathtaking photos/videos be available for us to see?" Oh - you lost them in a house move? That's a shame..."

It takes extra time but if you are going to have interviews, that's what Paracast listeners want to hear and what should elevate your show even higher above the other shows.

I think I've heard almost all of the shows now (so it can't be bad!) and hope my observations are therefore relevant.

Regards,

Ian

Hello everyone. This is Guy Weddle the Co-Host from the Church of Mabus.

The David Biedny Interview:
-First off let me say i was not involved in the promotion of the show on these and other forums and did not find out until much later what had transpired. I apologize on behave of TCoM radio show, things got out of hand to due some other issues with some other hosts and The Paracast somehow got thrown in with that.

-I completely stand by David and this interview except for the personal attacks on Gene and his finances and what transpired afterwards on the Mabus forums. The links have been removed and the episode has been taken down until further notice.

My only motive for doing this, is because I feel it is the right thing to do. We all have common goals, and we all just want to do the best shows possible for our different fan bases.

I read a lot. I see what is presented. I notice what is never mentioned. Consider research categories: genetic research, nuclear research, medical research...etc. What has been missing for the past 40 years?

MAGNETIC research. Without a doubt, research into INTENSE magnetic fields is never in popular media. Nor have I found much of anything looking deeper using the internet.

I've tried to bring this up with the few engineers I know, and they shy away from the subject. Seems people know they should not even THINK about something that is not present in societies of knowledge if it is absent....because POWERFUL interests have made it absent. Nobody wants to be disappeared.

Guys, find a guest who can shed light on this gaping hole in application of science. An entire FORCE of the universe is a freaking secret (almost like they made knowledge of electricity a secret....it's that extreme!).

What do YOU think, reader of this post?

Thanks for this smart and informative show. I have low hopes that the government will do anything to acknowledge the subject officially, as it is still a political suicide. I think there may be actual interest and support on both sides of the aisle for something like this, but it's a long way before somebody is willing to step forward in an official capacity to do something about it, especially in this time of unemployment and monetary crisis. If something is going to happen, it will be -- as in the case of space travel -- from the private sector.

Nice of Chris and Gene to touch upon specifically the apparent ETH bias of the book, which may be sensible for book sales and keeping it all pointed to a simple soundbite reality instead of clouding the issue with the real uncertainty of EVERYTHING related to the subject. I wish this wasn't the case, but I suppose I can appreciate her narrow and precise focus.

The word ufo is to the greater public like the Robert Anton Wilson's use of 'fnord.' It draws ridicule and derision that you can only liken to religious fervor. It occludes the issue. I wish her book had been called Unidentified Flying Objects instead of using the shorthand word (which has become a word meaning 'an alien craft that crazy people believe in' -- the acronym has ceased to exist).

But in short, a very interesting episode, hope she can get to some high visibility programs and manages to avoid both the religious and the atheist nutcases on the issue. And would be great if you can get her and Fyfe Symington (sp?) on the show after a few months has passed, to recap the reception and observe the momentum.

Cheers, --JT.

Hey, I know it costs money to keep doing this but . . .

1. Frankly, I don't support the mindset of some of the sponsors. I'm not a survivalist nor a Tea Party advocate and their commercials seemed specifically aimed at that demographic. I'm interested in paranormal activity, and guess what, it doesn't follow that people who are interested in paranormal topics also agree with or support the political viewpoint these advertisers are trying to market to. In fact, I emphatically don't.

2. The sound not only sucks (coming in brief staccato bursts), but when I decided I didn't want to listen to any more of the broadcast, I found that it had hijacked my computer and I couldn't get it to stop. I shut every app and restarted and it came back on! I had to uninstall then reinstall my browser to get your damn broadcast to stop playing.

3. I'm done as a Paracast listener.

B-Bye

The show has evolved into crap.

It went from a talented, independent, hard-hitting, almost skeptical paranormal podcast into a sold-out whore of mediocre quasi-intellectual nonsense that satisfies neither the skeptic nor the believer.

Further, it has become an ad-ridden menace that I have already deleted from my computer.

Don't send me the "we miss you" emails anymore either. When you "miss me" just email one your advertisers, there's lots to choose from, they will keep you company.

Don't know what happened to you, Gene.. I wish David were back to talk you out of all of this.

Even the new intro sucks.

Maybe send me an email when you go back to what made you popular.