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!
Yea, my BS meter was ringing loudly from the start. For me it culminated with the way he skirted questions about his methodoly, or lack thereof, and his unreflected assessment that electro-magnetic interference = paranormal activity. He didn't even attempt to justify that in any way, but thus concluded that paranormal activity was described in the scientific/engineering literature!?!? That was pretty aggravating to me, the same kind of non-argumentation as a Bible-thumper might make use of.I just listened to the first few segments on my way to work, and my BS meter went off the chart when he refused to say where he got or is getting his graduate degrees from. ...
Yea, my BS meter was ringly loudly from the start. For me it culminated with the way he skirted questions about his methodoly, or lack thereof, and his unreflected assessment that electro-magnetic interference = paranormal activity. He didn't even attempt to justify that in any way, but thus concluded that paranormal activity was described in the scientific/engineering literature!?!? That was pretty aggravating to me, the same kind of non-argumentation as a Bible thumper might make use of.
Basically, he either seemed to not want to answer, or he simply didn't understand why he should questions about methodology.
Two thumbs down for me.
Its become more about hits and downloads than the truth anymore.
It's very easy to explain that we should stop a guest at every sentence and debunk them why they make a mistake or state a possible falsehood. In practice we get criticized if we go too far. So it's a balance. But that's why we have forums, and a place for you to ask questions of a guest. Quite often we provide links to their sites, so you know in advance their positions.My BS radar went off the charts. For one the shady excuses for not giving more information about his educational background. If he actually paid for Physics degree, he should seek a refund. Apparently he did not learn anything.
He stated that sound traveled at 660 mph at sea level. Wrong speed of sound at sea level 761.2 mph.
Very disappointed in the approach the Paracast has taken with guests in recent weeks. Where is critical thinking, the hardnose questions? You are openly critical of other paranormal show hosts whom fail to ask the tough questions. I honestly see little difference between Paracast recently, and Coast to Coast.
Add to that, to defend last weeks guest. The guy's science is bunk, plain and simple. Its become more about hits and downloads than the truth anymore.
My BS radar went off the charts. For one the shady excuses for not giving more information about his educational background. If he actually paid for Physics degree, he should seek a refund. Apparently he did not learn anything.
He stated that sound traveled at 660 mph at sea level. Wrong speed of sound at sea level 761.2 mph.
Very disappointed in the approach the Paracast has taken with guests in recent weeks. Where is critical thinking, the hardnose questions? You are openly critical of other paranormal show hosts whom fail to ask the tough questions. I honestly see little difference between Paracast recently, and Coast to Coast.
Add to that, to defend last weeks guest. The guy's science is bunk, plain and simple. Its become more about hits and downloads than the truth anymore.
I'm tired of all the bla bla from people who want to sound scientific, but don't respect the scientific method, or the collective work of thousands of peers. Don't go for the scientific angle if you can't go all the way! And few can, if they are not trained. Anyone who understands the collective amount of knowledge that points at Big Bang as a reality should know that you must be exceptionally well-argumented to counter it and receive interest from people who know all the faulty arguments already, from their students' questions or the history of science...
So lets look at a bit of what most people think of as hard core science, the big bang theory. Now we can talk about red shift and back ground radiation as much as you want, using pages and pages over very difficult mathematics. Yet if you look at it's time line, the details of the theory has changed as often as the narrative from a bad liar. Even today for the big bang theory to work, Dark Matter (absolutely no evidence of it exists) is required to make up 80% of the universe. Yet should any other theory be raised (even from academia itself), it is attacked with the same ferocity as the church attacked Nicolaus Copernicus,..
I'm tired of all the bla bla from people who want to sound scientific, but at the same time don't respect the scientific method, or the collective work of thousands of peers. Don't go for the scientific angle if you can't go all the way! And few can, if they are not trained, anyone who understands the collective amount of knowledge that points at Big Bang as a reality should know that you must be exceptionally well-argumented to counter it and receive interest from others.
My argument was that a professional sees all the pitfalls in an argument, which the amateur doesn't.I hear this argument all the time, 'you just don't understand the whole argument'.
My argument was that a professional sees all the pitfalls in an argument, which the amateur doesn't.
No, you confuse 'amateur' with 'pioneer'.All scientific research into new areas, is amateur research..