• 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!

July 19, 2015 — Greg Bishop and Walter Bosley


Forums New posts
Gene Steinberg

Gene Steinberg

Forum Super Hero
Staff member
Putting Greg Bishop and Walter Bosley in the same virtual room was a terrific experience, thought-provoking, provocative. When it comes to these two, not much is off the table as they explore the frontiers of reality in our paranormal universe.

The only problem: The show didn't give us enough time to explore their views, so we invited them to stay on for this week's episode of After The Paracast, available to subscribers of The Paracast+.

For more information about our premium service:

Introducing The Paracast+ | The Paracast — The Gold Standard of Paranormal Radio
 
To Greg and Walter. I consider this one of my most important posts at the Paracast...

Walter, you and I think almost identically about the social engineering aspects. I vaguely remember what you mentioned about what Von Braun thought what the PTB would do, so I'll have to search that out. Now I have the confirmation bias to keep me going. LOL. This is waayyy waayyy deeper than just black-ops and MIC. I've never thought just that. No way! This is about creating the future and master minding it on a grand scale, but like you, Walter, said about the ink in the water it's JUST injected when/where it's needed. The rabid interests in high tech and SyFy is ALREADY absolutely predominant and dominating all forms of media entertainment now! Look to Ray Kurzweil as an example of creating Brain Trusts with his popular singularity ideas. You see, this is an even broader issue than even ET-UFO's too. Imo. Yes, it's PTB. There are many PTB. Bigelow. Media Entertainment. With mass media it is NOT necessary to use "total control" on a micro scale. The entertainment ink works just by injecting it at the right moments [UFO wave 1947] and then it spreads without much need to "mind control" or fire a weapon. The entertainment media is far more powerful already. The Storytellers in the media have the real power now! The MIC and Entertainment SyFy Storytellers make Trillions on this. Follow the money.

Walter and Greg, you really need to consider this possibly below that I think is very likely true. And, this lends evidence Humans and terrestrial phenomenon are causing the ET-UFO and related phenomenon. But it's NOT ET. Seriously, consider the following. Please comment if possible...

Any advanced intelligence with similar abilities and interests in the Universe will have long since discovered life on our planet. We would have been explored by probes or other means within the last billion years or so. But is that very likely? Here are some good reasons to consider that it probably never happened... Will it ever happen? Maybe not...

Don't forget and keep in mind there is no reason intelligent life necessarily has to follow down a path we Humans have taken. We've had millions [or billions?] of life forms on our planet and only one came into being by sheer accident that does what we do. We are EXTREMELY rare on our planet. The odds are astronomical against Human intelligence happening.

We may be far more unique than most people believe. We needed Jupiter, our moon, and asteroids or comet impacts to create the conditions for Humans to come into existence. The odds are astronomical against an intelligent life form like ours existing just on our planet. It will be the same everywhere else assuming life generates easily enough on planets like ours. Meaning, it will never happen on most life giving planets. Btw, I don't think we've found a match yet in our galaxy of any planet being near identical to ours, nor have we found it within a protective solar system either.

Something tells me we are far more astronomically unique than we are being led to believe. Another "mythology control" objective that aids the PTB and MIC too? Certainly The Storytellers are telling us we are not alone, but are they telling us the truth that intelligent life does not exist as we do? The odds were astronomical against Humans taking form on our planet, and all other millions or billions of life forms here had no need to do what we do. We are likely very alone in the Universe with few intelligent life forms more advanced than we are if we consider what it took to produce Humans on planet Earth. We may even wipe-out our species soon if we can't protect our planet from impacts and the coming ice ages or self-destruction. At the rate we're going we may only have a slim chance of succeeding. We'll be lucky to colonize the Moon and Mars.
 
Last edited:
i just started listening to the show and i already have a question only three minutes in:

while i completely understand and agree with spacebrother's assertion of working with smaller groups...this advice could apply to most any group as they become more bloated they also become more stagnant... and even trying to shut off outside noise, i was surprised by his follow up on sticking to a single premise and i am curious as to why he feels this should be an aspect of any new approach.

Is it because he thinks that the best way to eliminate the noise is to stay with that premise and hit it with every angle until one can completely embrace it or toss it ?
 
Wade: You assume it would stagnate, but is that a certainty? Also, consider that whether one embraces or tosses it might not change anything about its existence, whatever it is. Personally, whereas I'll discuss (not masturdebate) such things with anyone, I've tossed any need for agreement from anyone. It's nice when it happens but not necessary for me. :)
 
Well i guess stagnant is not exactly the term i should be using but certainly bogged down. I agree with his assertion, mostly from personal experiances, and indeed i have always wondered if there was a "magic number" that is an ideal number of people within a community or group that could ensure that a specific issue gets the attention it deserves YET avoids any of the obstacles that come when too many cooks are involved...i don't know if i made my point clear. it's just that i have become less community involved i.e. neighborhood issues, sierra club etc. because i have found that while the core issue brings in a number of well meaning people that for the most part find common cause with one another on the core issue but the more number of people involved increases the risks of various "riders" that are inevitable proposed and can bring things to a screeching halt.

Sort of like a peace rally where all involved agree they all want peace but other than that they can have different agendas that could conflict with one another and maybe even muck up that which they came together for.

hope that was somewhat coherant.
 
Last edited:
The larger the number of people, the bigger the suck. If someone's thing is acceptance by others then I suppose it's very important. But I find that just keeping most things to myself and enjoying the experience yields more value (and data).
 
So another question I have is there anything about hologram technology that you know of that could explain the discrepancy with what two people may report and or what a camera sees ? Could a hologram have a different appearance to two seperate individuals and even an inanimate object like a camera and could this difference between explained scientifically i.e. Maybe the interpetations differ because of the way the light rays involved is being bent and manipulated or maybe even the angle and position of the percipients?


I tried googling intelligent hologram and didn't get anything particularly solid but it made for interesting imagination.
 
Last edited:
All I can say with any confidence is that I find it reasonable that an object can emit a signal to camouflage its appearance to the extent that a camera will not pick up its true image and more so when closer to the camera makes sense to me.
 
Also in reference to the question by Burnt State and the possibility of a telluric current having an effect on a person's thinking process or perception of reality. I would think that if a telluric current is ELF that by itself would be a factor. Submarines use the ELF portion of the radio spectrum to communicate with shore based stations because of their capacity to penetrate seawater and buildings not to mention whale craniums. If it effects whales navigational instincts...Therefore their perceptions...it would likely effect humans as well. I don't know if this would include a hallucitory experience but if it took place where the geological conditions are right ( highwater table sandy soil ,crystalized rock granite magnatite etc.) it could go that level. I know this is pretty much what Walter said but he did so in such a way that suggested ELF might do this in spite of its properties when i think it should be a factor because of its properties.
 
Greg Bishop's suggestions introduce common sense into the study of possible alien exploration of Earth.

Investigating reports of sightings and abductions might include, in addition to questions about the recent history and state of mind of the interviewee, some questions about their physical health. An actual medical exam would be ideal if anyone would submit to it, but at the very least they should be asked if they experience headaches, dizziness, fainting, blackouts, or disturbances in their vision. If they drink and/or take drugs, pain killers, sleeping pills. And they should be asked if they have seen anything else out of the ordinary, to determine if they might be subject to hallucinations.
 
Wade Ridsdale said:
i just started listening to the show and i already have a question only three minutes in:

while i completely understand and agree with spacebrother's assertion of working with smaller groups...this advice could apply to most any group as they become more bloated they also become more stagnant... and even trying to shut off outside noise, i was surprised by his follow up on sticking to a single premise and i am curious as to why he feels this should be an aspect of any new approach.

Is it because he thinks that the best way to eliminate the noise is to stay with that premise and hit it with every angle until one can completely embrace it or toss it ?
Click to expand...

If I was not clear, I meant that groups should keep to one subject at a time before moving on. When they are ready to share their findings (if any) they should share ALL of their methodology and data. Then others can replicate or review the findings.
 
dmanister said:
Greg Bishop's suggestions introduce common sense into the study of possible alien exploration of Earth.

Investigating reports of sightings and abductions might include, in addition to questions about the recent history and state of mind of the interviewee, some questions about their physical health. An actual medical exam would be ideal if anyone would submit to it, but at the very least they should be asked if they experience headaches, dizziness, fainting, blackouts, or disturbances in their vision. If they drink and/or take drugs, pain killers, sleeping pills. And they should be asked if they have seen anything else out of the ordinary, to determine if they might be subject to hallucinations.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Good suggestions. There ought to be a good way to winnow the questions down to a new group that results in maximum information for a minimum of queries, but I am not sure how that would be done. Using credentialed medical and mental health professionals would be a good start.

I am becoming such a purist that I wouldn't even use the terms "alien" or "exploration" as they might be leading.

What I am saying is that there may be a way to frame new research so that there are a minimum of assumptions imposed.
 
spacebrother said:
Thank you. Good suggestions. There ought to be a good way to winnow the questions down to a new group that results in maximum information for a minimum of queries, but I am not sure how that would be done. Using credentialed medical and mental health professionals would be a good start.

I am becoming such a purist that I wouldn't even use the terms "alien" or "exploration" as they might be leading.

What I am saying is that there may be a way to frame new research so that there are a minimum of assumptions imposed.
Click to expand...

Maybe the word "alien" will be used correctly when the public becomes more familiar with our own adventures in space. The Far Horizons craft flew over the surface of Pluto -- over 3 billion miles away -- making us aliens from outer space!

NASA releases mind-blowing flyover video of Pluto
 
Last edited:
Really enjoyed this one...everyone seems to have gone through various cognitive/emotional periods and arrived in similar spot.

Part of me slightly predicts this sequence of phases:

1. It becomes clear that the "problem" of subjectivity cannot be overcome
2. A "flexible consciousness" viewpoint becomes more accepted and integrated
3. The buddhist idea of nothingness enters the discourse and some become less active in the field as a result
4. A final settling on pragmatism as "truth"
5. Objectivity become en vogue once again.
6. Repeat this process. Until the asteroid comes.
 
Enjoyable episode and thanks for asking one of my questions.

To make a half-serious point: In some ways Greg undermines his argument for a rebooting of "ufology" as he always manages to instigate or participate in interesting, thought-provoking conversations using what we currently have as a basis...

On the subjective versus objective discussion I'm surprised Chris didn't bring up his SLV camera project, as this project assumes, at least I hope it does, that the phenomenon being seen in the valley can be documented. Once everything is up and running it'll be interesting to compare any available witness testimony with what the camera and other instruments capture. Will they show for example structures, colours or unachievable movements that those on the ground may describe? And if there is a mismatch between the captured images and the witness' perception what could be a suitable explanation?
 
Two quotes from Zen Buddhism seem to guide my thinking these days. I found them in the last few months. The first is from the Japanese master Dogen:

"You must not cling to the words of the old sages either; they, too, may not be right. Even if you believe them, you should be alert so that , in the event that something superior comes along, you may follow that."

The other is from the Chinese Zen philosopher Chung-Feng Ming Pen:

"It cannot be understood by logic; it cannot be transmitted in words; it cannot be explained in writing; it cannot be measured by reason. It is like . . . a great fire that consumes all who come near it."
 
Back
Top