• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Andrew B. Colvin show


dyingsun

Paranormal Adept
Oh Boy..

a fountain of information for sure, I guess. I will actually buy his book, just to see if it is as incoherent as the show/interview was . I realise I'm just a listener to a podcast here, but honestly...I think he covered every paranormal subject ever in that show, and...yeah well.

He sounded like a nice guy. (explosion)
 
Colvin seems to find "connections" between anything and everything (I guess there's people like that). At various point in the show I felt that Gene would stop the interview and say "hey, can you be coherent for 5 straight minutes?" (I guess that's why I heard the whole show).
If the show was a few minutes longer I guess that the guest would say that JFK was shot by a man in black who, in turn, had visited his uncle in West Virginia where, in the sixties, the Mothman appeared... :)
Seriously, one of the most absurd and uninformative Paracasts ever!
 
Seriously, one of the most absurd and uninformative Paracasts ever!

Agreed.

I love this part: "My father may have been murdered by a Man in Black: He was injected with cancer!"

In all seriousness, this is the kind of guest that gives the entire paranormal field a bad name. Where's Michael Shermer when you need him?
 
sad to say, but i have to agree with all these posts and i'm one of those pesky believers. there is such thing as trying too hard to find a connection, it was almost like the MIB, bigfoot and the Mothman along with Charles Manson (w/lynette fromme as his accomplice) may or may not have been responsible for the assination of JFK.

the interview came out as a cross between steve quayle meets david wilcock in which a smorgasboard of paranormal paraphernalia was tossed at us it was hard to keep up without a score card, now please don't bring this up again, thank you
 
I'll go with that. Chris and I had a great ride. But it's a big stretch to accept all this stuff. That doesn't mean he didn't raise some compelling points, though I wonder about the death of his dad and the possible cause.
 
Yea the whole part of the interview about his dad was pretty crazy but i do agree he raised some good points and it was interesting to hear his take on the TNT site and what he thought might have been going on there.I want to hear Nick Redferns opinion on Ingrid Cold being a M.I.B. Thanks for another good show :)
 
This was a very interesting show. I grew up and live just outside Huntington, WV but i've worked for the past 15 years in Point Pleasant, WV about 100 feet from where the Silver Bridge onramp was on the WV side. I thought he was jumping into wwaayy too many theories on about 90 percent of this. He was throwing so many theories out without going in depth on any of them, they all started to blur together. It was a cool show though. Nice to hear shows with issues regarding this local area. I've been listening to the past and current shows for the last couple years and you guys continue to do a great job!
 
I really, really enjoyed the show and I hope you have this guest back.

Mr Colvin brought up a lot of theories, did a lot of speculation, and suggested a lot of connections. It was fascinating. I don't need a "there isn't hard proof but I think it's possible" or a "some people believe" before every single statement regarding the anomolous. Mr Colvin didn't sound like the best public speaker to ever grace the radio, but did a pretty good job of being clear about when we was stating things as facts and when he was theorizing.
 
The books are coherent, yes, and most have indexes (although the references are placed within the text). Unfortunately, I can't be blamed for all the weird phenomena that was going on during and after the Mothman flap. Blame the ETs or the military, or some unknown ultraterrestrials, whichever belief you are inclined to believe. But it was NOT a barn owl that burned downed our grade school, car-bombed my dad's best friend, or stuck him with a needle in the middle of the night, to name a few.

---------- Post added at 10:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:23 AM ----------

Let me know the number of theories you are able to handle, and I will try to limit those in the future, as well as try to force radio hosts to comply.

---------- Post added at 10:26 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:25 AM ----------

I am actually more of a skeptic, probably more than most of you.

---------- Post added at 10:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:26 AM ----------

The JFK conspirators were in Pt. Pleasant. That much we know. But those who think this is outrageous are either slow or uninformed, and will probably remain so.

---------- Post added at 10:37 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:28 AM ----------

Good public speakers are often assholes. And a lot of them went through advanced training on how to fit into today's media culture, which is all about soundbites and empty thinking. And a lot of them are co-opted by the spooks. The leading lights in any field are the first ones they go after, and the leading lights are often keeping other, more controversial and truthful theories from seeing the light of day. A case in point is Loren Coleman and Jerome Clark. Clark keeps the lid on the cattle mutes, and Coleman keeps the lid on Mothman. They have actually managed to have me completely removed from the Mothman Wikipedia page. Where my reference used to be, there are now new references to both of them. They seem to "own" the editors at Wikipedia, and it is a sad state of affairs, because it results in a dumbing down of the field. Spooks + Dupes = Ufology Group.

I really, really enjoyed the show and I hope you have this guest back.

Mr Colvin brought up a lot of theories, did a lot of speculation, and suggested a lot of connections. It was fascinating. I don't need a "there isn't hard proof but I think it's possible" or a "some people believe" before every single statement regarding the anomolous. Mr Colvin didn't sound like the best public speaker to ever grace the radio, but did a pretty good job of being clear about when we was stating things as facts and when he was theorizing.


---------- Post added at 10:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:37 AM ----------

Oh Boy..

a fountain of information for sure, I guess. I will actually buy his book, just to see if it is as incoherent as the show/interview was . I realise I'm just a listener to a podcast here, but honestly...I think he covered every paranormal subject ever in that show, and...yeah well.

He sounded like a nice guy. (explosion)

So, do you think people like "specialists" more than multi-specialists - those who have a broader range of knowledge? If I confined myself to only one thing, then people would complain that it doesn't link up to other areas enough. You can't win with some people.
 
For my part I just commented on the show itself. I have no opinion whatsoever on Andy Colvin as a person, since I don't know him, or as a writer, since I haven't read his books. From the viewpoint of an interested listener, who expected to hear an informative debate on the mothman subject, I felt I didn't learn anything new. The podcast was confusing and some of the connections made by Andy seemed outlandish, but that may also be the result of a lack of further explanation. Maybe another show, more focused on particular subjects would be good.
 
For my part I just commented on the show itself. I have no opinion whatsoever on Andy Colvin as a person, since I don't know him, or as a writer, since I haven't read his books. From the viewpoint of an interested listener, who expected to hear an informative debate on the mothman subject, I felt I didn't learn anything new. The podcast was confusing and some of the connections made by Andy seemed outlandish, but that may also be the result of a lack of further explanation. Maybe another show, more focused on particular subjects would be good.

Well, I don't know you or have an opinion of you as a person, either but, looking at what you wrote, it seems that you feel it was "uninformative," etc., only because you rejected outright a lot of the information as "outrageous." Therefore, it is logical that you would walk away feeling uninformed. Would another show really do it for you? If you want solid evidence, get one of my books and you may see that it all adds up, unless you use the same filtering process when reading, too.
 
I don't think that trying to find connections between events that have some kind of relationship (temporal, geographical, etc) is wrong. In fact, that is in the very fabric of logic and reason - most (if not all) of mankind's greatest discoveries resulted from someone looking beyond and above what was known at the time and breaking boundaries, linking otherwise independent facts into a coherent, verifiable whole. Some of it may even seem preposterous at first sight, but if we look deeper we'll find the evidence behind the conclusions.
You mentioned that the "JFK conspirators" were in Point Pleasant. The may have even been there when mothman sighting reports first emerged. Does it mean that both facts are even remotely related in any meaningful way beyond the mere coincidence factor? What light does that shed on JFK's assassination or on the real nature of the mothman phenomenon? Going through any given almanac, within a certain frame of mind, anyone can find amazing links between this or that date, but is that going to lead us anywhere? Will our knowledge advance because of that? I don't think so.

P.S. - I realise it may seem unfair to comment someone's work based on just a radio show. For that I must underline the fact that I'm expressing opinions about that Paracast interview and nothing else.
 
Good public speakers are often assholes. And a lot of them went through advanced training on how to fit into today's media culture, which is all about soundbites and empty thinking.

I think that's a bit of a leap- it's a skill some people learn through a mundane career, or by doing a podcast (like how Chris has become a better and better host), or that some people just seem to have a natural knack for.

To clarify- by what I said I meant that you didn't sound like you were getting what you were saying across as well in The Paracast's more formal Q&A situation as you did on Greg Bishop's podcast, which is more conversational. I think people are often better suited for one format than the other.

But anyhow, I enjoyed both interviews, and I'm really captivated by all things Mothman/Pt Pleasant.

By the way, it's nice to hear a fellow Pacific Northwest denizen on a paranormal/UFO podcast. Is it me or are we kind of underrepresented?
 
I enjoyed the show. Food for thought on some of the stuff.
You have to wonder growing up surrounded by all that Mothman tradition and folklore how it would at least bend, if not warp, your sense of reality anyway.
 
Back
Top