-
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!
Get rid of Biedny
- Thread starter David Biedny
- Start date
Free episodes:
- Status
Rick Deckard
Paranormal Maven
Frozen E.T. Burrito said:
I don't think the 'people at the top' are human - what I mean is, yeah, they're physically human, but psychologically speaking, they're predatorial animals with no regard for human life or the suffering of others. All they care about is money and power and how to get more of it.
The 'people at the top' got there by wiping out the competition - if not this current generation, then certainly their ancestors.
The rest of us, who have some compassion for our fellow humans and who know the difference between right and wrong, have no choice but to let them have their 'wicked way' with us, because the alternative is to wipe them out and they've got armies at their disposal.
Survival of the 'fittest' (alternatively 'most vicious' / 'least compassionate' / 'capitalists').
Michael L.
Coffee swillin' Devil's advocate
How about an option that is DIFFERENT BIEDNY (and Gene)?
Meaning, I think there are some things that could be tweaked in the way both of you conduct yourselves on the show. It is a good podcast; it is interesting with good guests but I think both of you guys could benefit from a bit of coaching from an experienced radio producer if you are seriously trying to get the show syndicated. I am not saying sell out to marketing data, but have someone with a proven track record in talk radio give you a serious, formal consultation.
Honestly, the fact that it is extremely well made gives Coast a huge advantage over about every other show out there with a similar theme. Why? If the people making the programming decisions for a station could care less about the subject other than the fact they need a "paranormal show" (if they even use that polite a term), it won't matter how informed the host is or what slant he hits the topics from, just what his radio chops are! Seriously, why do you think Dreamland disappeared from the radio?
Just a friendly suggestion.
Meaning, I think there are some things that could be tweaked in the way both of you conduct yourselves on the show. It is a good podcast; it is interesting with good guests but I think both of you guys could benefit from a bit of coaching from an experienced radio producer if you are seriously trying to get the show syndicated. I am not saying sell out to marketing data, but have someone with a proven track record in talk radio give you a serious, formal consultation.
Honestly, the fact that it is extremely well made gives Coast a huge advantage over about every other show out there with a similar theme. Why? If the people making the programming decisions for a station could care less about the subject other than the fact they need a "paranormal show" (if they even use that polite a term), it won't matter how informed the host is or what slant he hits the topics from, just what his radio chops are! Seriously, why do you think Dreamland disappeared from the radio?
Just a friendly suggestion.
musictomyears
Skilled Investigator
David Biedny said:musictomyears said:
You actually think that Slemby Snoory gets anything out of his guests besides loads of bull twinkies? When Bruce "So To Speak" Goldberg rants on for hours about nonsensical drivel, ShnoorTea just plays mindlessly with his handlebars and occasionally proclaims "amazing!", and then mentions his intense jones for chicken sandwiches and phlegm. Anyone with any story can go on there and they won't be challenged in any way, and sure, there are plenty of people that love that kind of "entertainment". On The Paracast, we do indeed express our opinions, and make some judgements about things, 'cause, well, OUR BRAINS STILL WORK. We are NOT just passive meat puppets, we are RIGHT THERE with our guests, engaging them and asking them HARD questions. Perhaps it's not a popular stance, the whole BRAIN thing, but damn, we're such troublemakers, dontcha think? :
dB
Well, it seems you completely misunderstood my post.
I was trying to make the point that you can show more brains by abstaining from unrelated political interjections.
Again, I don't understand the blanket cynicism towards C2C. I don't listen to it frequently, I mostly know it from youtube postings, or when in the past I was researching certain Art Bell episodes. All in all, I may have listened to some 50 episodes. Not a single time did I feel the presenter was incompetent or bumbling about. Quite to the contrary, the conversational style was fast, to the point, and extremely respectful. Here comes that word again: C2C is a "professional" affair. I guess that's why it is popular.
If hosts of any show put themselves on a pedestal (wink, wink), or put themselves above their guests, many listeners will be put off by this attitude. It would be the same for a sports broadcast, a music show, and even dedicated political shows. For an example, I always have a hard time defending Alex Jones against his distractors, because he too tends to go off on a tangent. I wish he wouldn't do that... There you go.
Anyway, you may remember that I commended you on your show about Arigo. That was excellent. That's how it should be done.
tommyball
Skilled Investigator
musictomyears said:
I listen to C2C if there's a guest I'm interested in. (FYI - George Knapp is now a monthly guest host and worth listening to.) I think C2C does deserve some credit for popularizing this subject matter (albeit for better or worse) and unfortunately that is the extent of their show more or less. You won't find a serious debate or interview like on The Paracast. Guests get to return again and again without any respect to their credibility. Those that have been widely shown to be charlatans are invited back to spread their fantastic tales and prophecies, just wasting everyone's time, while guests that are reputable are rarely given a forum to go into the depth that their hard work and research deserves; three hours are spent in an often superficial overview of the evening's topic. The show exists to turn listeners on to the possibilities of the paranormal, not to shed anymore light onto the phenomenon.
Regarding this thread specifically, unless there's an option for a longer show, then please don't change a thing. Rock on, David.
-todd.
Jose Collado
Skilled Investigator
There should be an option that reads "Get rid of annoying, complaining listeners"
Last time I checked, no one was holding a gun to anyone's head when they chose to subscribe to the podcasts. Yet, these people still listen and continue complain.
Keep the show as it is...they're going to complain about something regardless
Damn you Biedny, I don't like the colour of the 'subscribe' button on my iTunes...AND it's raining outside...OH....OHHH no milk for my coffee in the studio kitchen?? Right, you've gone too far this time man.
*Ren Hoek squeel*
Last time I checked, no one was holding a gun to anyone's head when they chose to subscribe to the podcasts. Yet, these people still listen and continue complain.
Keep the show as it is...they're going to complain about something regardless
Damn you Biedny, I don't like the colour of the 'subscribe' button on my iTunes...AND it's raining outside...OH....OHHH no milk for my coffee in the studio kitchen?? Right, you've gone too far this time man.
*Ren Hoek squeel*
David Biedny
Paranormal Adept
As to the issue of "professionalism" in radio, I'll call Rush LimpBow, O'Reilly, Coulter, Beck, Hennity, and the rest of the NeoFascists, and let them know that their lack of professionalism - actually, humanity - has cost them the loss of audience and revenues. I'm sure that they will see the light and mend their ways.
dB
dB
David Biedny
Paranormal Adept
musictomyears said:
The Arigo episode was a personal favorite of mine - the case is extensive and fascinating, the coverage of the case on ANY paranormal show is nil, except for The Paracast. Thanks again for the commendation.
As far as my comments regarding George Shnoored and C2C, I personally feel that this dolt does a serious disservice to the field of paranormal research, by promoting charlatans, inbreds and scamsters. George has zero understanding of the situation, and his ignorance is put to the service of muddying the waters of paranormal research and investigation. For every decent guest, they host ten other morons who have nothing to add to the conversation. And if you want a direct opinion from one of his guests, ask Mr. Vaeni about the wonderful experience he had during - and after - his appearance on the ShnoorCam show.
C2C is popular because of the 8000 pound gorilla that puts them on the air and gives them the dollars to engage in "professional" production values. Compare that to what Gene & I have been able to create with spit and hope, and I honestly feel I can say that given half their financial resources and a time slot putting us against them, we could topple them within months. People are hungry for some actual meat at this point, and they listen to C2C because there's no direct competition in the middle of the night. It's that simple - if you think the "quality" of their show is what makes them so popular, well, I have a lovely bridge in Brooklyn I can sell you cheap, cheap cheap.
And as far as the "putting on a pedestal" comment, if you think I do that with regards to myself, well, the truth is that I'm fairly down on myself, as most of my closest friends can confirm. Am I more intelligent than the majority of folks doing paranormal radio? Call me an egotistical asshole, but sadly, I am, which gives me little hope for humanity.
OK, enough about me, I'm off to start a UFO/Apple Computer/chocolate/Radiohead cult in the Argentinian Pampa. I'll invite all you down to visit, but you must bring me a piece of Thom Yorke's ears covered in Swiss one-armed chocolate, in one of those lovely Apple store bags, and I'll let you ride in my UFO (if you promise to keep it's location secret).
dB
David Biedny
Paranormal Adept
As far as Knapp and C2C, they recently had an episode with that sad, sick little shit shilling the Swiss cheese UFO hoax, and Jeff & I had contacted Knapp ahead of time, asking to be allowed to defend ourselves against the slander and lies that we knew this asshole would spew about us. Jeff went so far as to assemble a fairly comprehensive portfolio for Knapp regarding his work on the case, and all we asked for was the opportunity to state our own positions. Well, we got nada. I haven't heard the show, so I can't comment on it. Shnoory has been told by more than a few people that he should let me address the slanderous slime thrown at my by the slight sociopath mentioned above, and to this day, has never been fair and allowed me to present my side of the story. So yeah, part of my gripe about Snoory is personal, there you have it, welcome to the real world.
dB
dB
Rick Deckard
Paranormal Maven
David Biedny said:
...and this just feels like spinning plates...
David Biedny said:
Surely you mean 'IFO'...
David Biedny said:
Your fine in my book I have listened to most the shows, most of what you say I dont have a problem with, but a small suggestion or comment that might help things, is follows.
Tangents appear to happen alot on the Paracast
1. Debates on how UFOlogy is broken
2. Religion vs. Science debate seems to be a tangent
I like your show but it gets off to a side debate alot generally if you stick to paranormal investigations it might help
lotusland
Paranormal Novice
Seeing as this thread has segued into a rant about C2C, I guess I'll add my 2 cents.
First off, Snoory is abysmal and has lowered the quality of the show completely. I never listen to any of his interviews anymore, even when the guests are worthwhile as those interviews are so painfully conducted. His obvious lack of understanding/interest in this subject matter is apparent by the inane questions he asks. It's clear he either doesn't listen to the guests responses, or he is incapable of following the thread of a conversation which isn't centered around him. His self-referential musings and constant need for affirmation from his guests and listeners is nauseating. There is a substantial thread online entitled "George Noory Sucks" with more than 28000 posts about him, so yeah, his incompetence in this arena has been duly noted.
On the other hand, I think Ian Punnett does a great job interviewing guests, even if he may be a newcomer to the scene of the paranormal. He actually reads the guests' books, asks insightful questions and doesn't let the flakes get away with nonsense. He's definitely a skeptic, albeit an open-minded one. I recall one interview with a guest who claimed he had a device which could talk to the dead - of course the guest wouldn't run a live test of it, nor had any audio to back this claim up so what did Ian say? "My bullsh*t meter is pretty high on this one". Which is exactly what most of the listening audience was thinking!
Rollye James and George Knapp, when given guests that fall within their areas of expertise, are also great hosts. Unfortunately with Snoory being the voice of C2C on most nights, he has come to define the show. The weekends are still worth listening to, just not Mon - Fri.
Instead of comparing the paracast to C2C, why not define yourselves on your own terms? Your shows, and the feedback generated from them, are your benchmarks of excellence.
First off, Snoory is abysmal and has lowered the quality of the show completely. I never listen to any of his interviews anymore, even when the guests are worthwhile as those interviews are so painfully conducted. His obvious lack of understanding/interest in this subject matter is apparent by the inane questions he asks. It's clear he either doesn't listen to the guests responses, or he is incapable of following the thread of a conversation which isn't centered around him. His self-referential musings and constant need for affirmation from his guests and listeners is nauseating. There is a substantial thread online entitled "George Noory Sucks" with more than 28000 posts about him, so yeah, his incompetence in this arena has been duly noted.
On the other hand, I think Ian Punnett does a great job interviewing guests, even if he may be a newcomer to the scene of the paranormal. He actually reads the guests' books, asks insightful questions and doesn't let the flakes get away with nonsense. He's definitely a skeptic, albeit an open-minded one. I recall one interview with a guest who claimed he had a device which could talk to the dead - of course the guest wouldn't run a live test of it, nor had any audio to back this claim up so what did Ian say? "My bullsh*t meter is pretty high on this one". Which is exactly what most of the listening audience was thinking!
Rollye James and George Knapp, when given guests that fall within their areas of expertise, are also great hosts. Unfortunately with Snoory being the voice of C2C on most nights, he has come to define the show. The weekends are still worth listening to, just not Mon - Fri.
Instead of comparing the paracast to C2C, why not define yourselves on your own terms? Your shows, and the feedback generated from them, are your benchmarks of excellence.
musictomyears
Skilled Investigator
David Biedny said:
David Biedny said:
David, you may not be aware of it, but with statements such as the above, you come across as someone who is so full of himself he is about to explode.
So you reckon everyone who listens to C2C is not capable of determining what "quality" is - a highly subjective concept? You also insinuate that I'd be so stupid to try to buy a bridge from you? Do you really think making such a remark is funny? It isn't, it is condescending.
When Apple sells millions of iPhones, do you also put it down to some dark, manipulating forces that push the product, and to there being no competition? Or would you argue the other way round, and claim that Apple products are of superior "quality", and the high sales figures reflect this incontrovertible fact?
Why don't you leave comparisons of your IQ to others? I've known quite a few truly intelligent people in my life. What they had in common was a sense of modesty. They wouldn't publicly compare their intelligence with anybody else's, since they realised that all this would do is create an embarrassment for themselves.
"Welcome to the real world"? I've got news for you: That's were we all live. If you are so convinced that your guests, your audience, other broadcasters, and just about everybody is intellectually not on your level, why do you even bother with trying to educate the world about "the truth"? Surely, we aren't smart enough to ever understand you, and appreciate your wisdom?
Honestly, that kind of attitude is a major turn-off, and doesn't inspire me to listen to the Paracast.
David needs no defense from me. He is, in fact, is a brilliant talk show personality and I'm extremely blessed to be working with him.
As to C2C, a show's popularity doesn't necessarily relate to its quality. That show's network is owned by Clear Channel, and they have hundreds of millions of dollars with which to promote their "products" We have a budget of less-than-zero and no research staff or producers to write us prompts to tell us what to do and how to do it.
I think that it's a miracle we've come this far.
As to C2C, a show's popularity doesn't necessarily relate to its quality. That show's network is owned by Clear Channel, and they have hundreds of millions of dollars with which to promote their "products" We have a budget of less-than-zero and no research staff or producers to write us prompts to tell us what to do and how to do it.
I think that it's a miracle we've come this far.
- Status