June 28, 2015 — Richard Dolan

[Gene Steinberg]

This episode was very much about answering your questions, listeners. Yes, he did say something about "the topic that shall not be named," but he also covered a large number of other issues.

We respond in that spirit in this week's episode of After The Paracast.

You can learn more about our exclusive subscription podcast here:

Introducing The Paracast+ | The Paracast — The Gold Standard of Paranormal Radio

 

[wwkirk]

I was surprised to hear during After the Paracast that Chris is a 9/11 Truther. That seems to remove any objection to having a truther as a guest.

 

[ChrisJohnsen]

I'm only about 50 minutes in to the main program but I felt compelled to comment on the first few segments where the whole "Mexico City Shakedown" was discussed. I cannot believe Mr. Dolan's expressed opinion, with hindsight available and in effect, that the event wasn't a carefully planned hoax. His staunch defense of Maussan, Carey and Schmidt is unbelievable. Personally, I think they are guilty of fraud. The simple fact that these individuals had access to the mummified child slides for years and were allegedly not able to read the placard next to the body, yet mere days after the event the placard was clearly revealed, just goes to show that those involved were not interested in trying too hard to verify the origin of the body in the slides. What they obviously put most of their time and effort into was brainstorming how to create a large, money-making, publicity-driven event to line their pockets while deceiving the public. The, albeit unverified, numbers I've heard bandied about were 7,000 spectators and over 2 million paid streamers online. That is some very serious coin, even at half those numbers. I'd venture to guess that it was the most lucrative UFO-related public event ever conceived and executed.

I wasn't overly critical of Dolan attending the event, as he never made supportive comments about the veracity of the slides, but his post-event rationalizations and generous excusing of the main hoaxers involved leaves a really bad taste in my mouth and makes me seriously question his honesty, integrity and character, which makes me sad, because I had previously held him in relatively high regard.

That said, I'm excited to hear that he is writing a book on false flag events. It leaves me a bit conflicted, given my response above, but, if I'm being honest, I will probably buy the book when it comes out.

After The Paracast Update: So I'm listening to the latest ATP and I just want to comment on Chris' assertion that "we're beating a dead horse" when it comes to talking to Dolan about his involvement in the "Mexico City Shakedown." With due respect, this was the first extended conversation with Dolan, post-shakedown, and it was relevant to get his post-event take on the behavior and motivations of "his friends," Carey, Schmidt, Bragalia and Maussan. Yes, Dolan seems like a nice guy and he didn't want to "bad mouth" friends. Perhaps it is just me, but I find that a weak excuse considering the magnitude of the hoax perpetrated on the public and the apparent financial windfall that the coterie of hoaxers derived from the subsequent deception. I won't even get into the whole "it gave Ufology a black eye" meme. If any of my friends where involved in such chicanery, I would have no problem calling them out on their, diplomatically put, "misguided and poor decisions." Dolan whitewashed the whole affair and I found that extremely unfortunate.

With this week's episodes in the can and posted for all to enjoy, let us indeed put the whole "Mexico City Shakedown" behind us and move on to more discussion-worthy topics for future Paracast episodes.

Thanks, Gene and Chris, for your continued hard work and effort in producing one of the best podcasts out there.

 

[Pegusta]

Thanks for asking two of my questions and thanks to Richard for answering them in a straightforward way. I appreciate that.

As to his answering my first question about disclosure: He mentions that my argument was commonly voiced in the early days of ufology, and he is probably right. However this stance is in my opinion as valid today as it was back then. He further points to stories of crash retrievals some of which originated with Leonard Stringfield and that the knowledge gained from studying crafts and crew might somehow answered the fundamental questions still being asked today: Who or what is behind the UFO phenomenon and where’s it from?

I guess that could be true. Given there is substance to the (shady) stories involving crash retrievals I imagine some information could be gleaned from the study of said objects and bodies. But it beats me how you with certainty and decisively can answer above mentioned questions to a satisfactory degree. All we have at this point are interesting stories and for me frankly that’s not a hell of a lot to go by in terms of getting answers to the basic questions.

There is (in my opinion) no doubt that Richard has some well-placed sources. He mentions that one of them is or was placed high in the hierarchy of the US national intelligence community. He comes across as a sincere and trustworthy guy and I do not doubt him in this. But the point of the matter is that these types of sources figuratively speaking can be sharp swords cutting both ways. Basically while they are tapped into the grape wine they can dish out different types of interesting information if they choose to do so. However there is no guarantee that said information is precise. Bear with me as I get a bit conspiratorial and for a moment delve in to an area not necessarily directly connected to the UFO phenomenon.

One example to illustrate my point is the activities of the different intelligence and security services active during the cold war. Activities that to some extent prevented a cold war from getting uncomfortably warm. During this era though (and there is no reason to believe that the present day situation is any different) disinformation was used to perfection by different players in the field. Russian KGB and GRU for example had contacts in most political parties in neutral Sweden, as well as in the media and with prominent people in the cultural sector. Their western counterparts most probably had the same connections. These sources where used not only to get useful information from but even more importantly as spreaders of disinformation. The contacts in many cases knew they were being used for this purpose but maintained contact because they believed they could turn the tables on the agents and beat them at their own game. This basically never worked. But it’s an honest mistake to make, and I can see why many highly intelligent people took it as sort of a challenge. Nonetheless it was a perilous action aimed at professionals possessing all the tools an education in one of the toughest most skilled agencies in the world provided them with, be it CIA or KGB or any other similar agency. The contact most often got caught in a web of their own making.

My point being that even though such a source potentially might prove to be a real gold mine of information, it’s important to remember that the information process is entirely controlled by the professional, and the information should be viewed in this light.

But I do want to stress the point that I think Richard Dolan is a straightforward intelligent and highly capable researcher, although I don’t necessarily agree with him on everything. A very interesting episode with constructive and fruitful discussions.

I hope I get my point across and sorry for a long winded post.

(Side note: Really Tempted to sign up for Paracast plus………).

 

[Gene Steinberg]

And we are tempted to hope you will sign up for Paracast+

 

[ChrisJohnsen]

(Side note: Really Tempted to sign up for Paracast plus………).

Do it! You won't be sorry!

 

[Constance]

My point being that even though such a source potentially might prove to be a real gold mine of information, it’s important to remember that the information process is entirely controlled by the professional, and the information should be viewed in this light.

Thanks for this very thoughtful and well-informed post. I want to respond to the part I've underscored above. While it's true that some insiders leak accurate information and others generate disinformation, I think the insiders' control of the discourse has been diminished the more we have recognized and understood the motivations and intentions of the disinformationists. We see their motivations and understand their goals -- primarily to mislead or simply confuse ufo researchers and those who read them. The more we read the lengthy history disclosed in detailed and well-reasoned ufo research, the better equipped we become to critique and dismiss the leaks and false leads presented by the disinformationists.

You mention leaks provided to Leonard Stringfield, for example. My impression, but I don't know this, is that he had a longtime connection with an insider motivated to further civilian ufo research and perhaps disclosure of what the government and military knew. Similarly, I think it's likely that we can trust Bernard Haisch's reports from scientific colleagues of his employed in black projects involving back-engineering of alien crafts. Anyway, just my $.02.

 

[Pegusta]

Thanks for this very thoughtful and well-informed post. I want to respond to the part I've underscored above. While it's true that some insiders leak accurate information and others generate disinformation, I think the insiders' control of the discourse has been diminished the more we have recognized and understood the motivations and intentions of the disinformationists. We see their motivations and understand their goals -- primarily to mislead or simply confuse ufo researchers and those who read them. The more we read the lengthy history disclosed in detailed and well-reasoned ufo research, the better equipped we become to critique and dismiss the leaks and false leads presented by the disinformationists.

You mention leaks provided to Leonard Stringfield, for example. My impression, but I don't know this, is that he had a longtime connection with an insider motivated to further civilian ufo research and perhaps disclosure of what the government and military knew. Similarly, I think it's likely that we can trust Bernard Haisch's reports from scientific colleagues of his employed in black projects involving back-engineering of alien crafts. Anyway, just my $.02.

Your welcome Constance. Thanks!

You have a valid point. One need to always be aware of the fact that people have different motivations and play their own games. As long as there is an awareness of the dynamics you have a better chance of getting some interesting and usefull information out of different kinds of sources.

My main concern with the accounts of UFO crashes and subsequent retrievals is the great number of them. There are supposedly quite a few crashes all over the globe and somehow the authorities always seem to standing by to more or less conveniently grab these crafts as they come crashing down. These UFO-guys seem to be having some serious problems with malfuntioning hardware. One would assume that they had overcome these types of issues if they are as advanced as some presume they are (whatever they are and whereever they come from).

I would think that many of these stories are cover stories in themselves. Where top secret hardware, terrestrial in nature, is being tested. That would account for the fact that recovcery teams not seldom seem to be in the proximity of the crash sites. But I have no way of knowing of course.

And Paracast + is definitely something I will be signing up for in the near future. Unfortunately I am somewhat of a slow starter...............

 

[Gene Steinberg]

We'll do our best to help you start.

 

[SillyRaabit]

I really liked this show. I especially enjoyed the brief foray into false flags. I'd love a show devoted to this subject. And being a 9/11 "truther" can be a great many things. It doesn't mean you buy into Loose Change-style conspiracies.

 

[Sub-light]

Wow great show! So much good stuff. The question I had asked on the question forum for Richard had to do with the October 1965 encounter at Edwards AFB. I was wondering about what he knew about that. I also liked the bit about false flags. One of the things that has always fascinated me about UFOs is the official handling of it by agencies, military, government Private Industry. it's very interesting and very telling and false flags is another one of those types of intriguing subjects that ties and do that.

 

[Tor1976]

Dolan's flippant comments subsequent to the unraveling of the Roswell Slides hoax has not only left a bad taste in the mouth, it draws all his research into question because it draws his judgment into question. He saw nothing wrong with the way the slides affair had been handled up to the point he was approached by Mausan; saw nothing wrong with the claims of provenance which should have been a huge red flag, and accepted a paid vacation to Mexico City to sit on the stage and lend his name and image to the farce. Sorry, you guys are soft peddling on this because we all have a hard time getting past how "nice" Richie is. I'm well over it. Everyone seems to have forgotten his role in the "Anonymous Deathbed Confession" bullshit, a case so transparently nonsensical 10 minutes of Google searches could debunk it, yet Dolan himself sees fit to let copies of the interview sit on Youtube, and that sucker is really running. KAching. $$$$$$. One copy of the interview has garnered over 2 million page views since it was posted.

Dolan's entire speculative oeuvre hinges on the alleged "leaks" he receives from his "highly placed" inside sources. I'm declaring it all bunk. Dolan writes a good yarn, that's about it. His direct involvement in these 2 cases alone demonstrate horrendous judgment.

After the Anonymous thing I was willing to give Dolan a pass, but this Roswell slides bs has demonstrated he's a traveling snake oil salesman.

 

[dmanister]

Pegusta wrote:

"These UFO-guys seem to be having some serious problems with malfuntioning hardware. One would assume that they had overcome these types of issues if they are as advanced as some presume they are (whatever they are and whereever they come from)."


NASA has achieved successful soft landings on Venus, Jupiter, the Moon and even on a moon of Saturn. If we can do it, isn't it likely that an advanced civilization with an understanding of physics and technology far superior to ours, that has been sending craft to Earth for perhaps centuries, would not have perfected landing here?

Just as our craft analyze the terrain and atmospheres of distant planets, alien missions to Earth would not be uninformed about landing conditions here. It seems absurd to suggest not only that alien craft are crashing here, but also that they are anything but drones more sophisticated than anything we can imagine. What possible reason would there be to send a live crew here? If they wanted to see if they could survive on our planet, they could duplicate our environment from data and samples their drones collected.

As Richard noted on the show, it's likely that our military already has highly classified advanced drones with capabilities we can only imagine. How much more capable would the drones be from a civilization that has routinely visited other planets?

In the area of alien abduction, Mike Clelland's book sounds like a must-have. My quarrel with Mike's research however is his lack of data from control groups that should be compared with data from abductees. His claim that abductees have an abundance of synchronicity experiences isn't valid unless he can show that non-abductees have fewer synchronicities. And he doesn't. Of course he can claim that frequent synchronicity experiences suggest a person is an abductee and doesn't know it! But that would confirmation-bias, a habit of only seeing data that agrees with your theory.

 

[Burnt State]

...it's likely that our military already has highly classified advanced drones with capabilities we can only imagine. How much more capable would the drones be from a civilization that has routinely visited other planets?

if we're not yet a Type 1 civilization then i would suspect that the scales of information that could be gathered by drones from Type 2 and Type 3 civilizations would be so substantially distant from each other that we could not yet begin to comprehend what they were gathering nor how they were gathering it.

In the area of alien abduction, Mike Clelland's book sounds like a must-have. My quarrel with Mike's research however is his lack of data from control groups that should be compared with data from abductees. His claim that abductees have an abundance of synchronicity experiences isn't valid unless he can show that non-abductees have fewer synchronicities. And he doesn't. Of course he can claim that frequent synchronicity experiences suggest a person is an abductee and doesn't know it! But that would confirmation-bias, a habit of only seeing data that agrees with your theory.

Agreed about Mike, he is entirely offbeat and sincerely passionate about his experiences. You can't fault him for his enthusiasm or his very create engagement with his subject matter. A lot of his methodology strikes me as more anecdotal, and are even meditations sometimes on different features of the abduction narrative. Synchronicities and owls seem to figure prominently amongst other touchstones. He is very interesting to listen too, especially once you've adapted to his audio edit cue that frequently can repeat.

 

[Pegusta]

Pegusta wrote:

"These UFO-guys seem to be having some serious problems with malfuntioning hardware. One would assume that they had overcome these types of issues if they are as advanced as some presume they are (whatever they are and whereever they come from)."


NASA has achieved successful soft landings on Venus, Jupiter, the Moon and even on a moon of Saturn. If we can do it, isn't it likely that an advanced civilization with an understanding of physics and technology far superior to ours, that has been sending craft to Earth for perhaps centuries, would not have perfected landing here?

Just as our craft analyze the terrain and atmospheres of distant planets, alien missions to Earth would not be uninformed about landing conditions here. It seems absurd to suggest not only that alien craft are crashing here, but also that they are anything but drones more sophisticated than anything we can imagine. What possible reason would there be to send a live crew here? If they wanted to see if they could survive on our planet, they could duplicate our environment from data and samples their drones collected.

As Richard noted on the show, it's likely that our military already has highly classified advanced drones with capabilities we can only imagine. How much more capable would the drones be from a civilization that has routinely visited other planets?

In the area of alien abduction, Mike Clelland's book sounds like a must-have. My quarrel with Mike's research however is his lack of data from control groups that should be compared with data from abductees. His claim that abductees have an abundance of synchronicity experiences isn't valid unless he can show that non-abductees have fewer synchronicities. And he doesn't. Of course he can claim that frequent synchronicity experiences suggest a person is an abductee and doesn't know it! But that would confirmation-bias, a habit of only seeing data that agrees with your theory.

I am not ruling out the possibility of outsiders coming here to Earth. But I have not seen conclusive evidence pointing in that direction either. To be fair- what little evidence we have when it comes to UFOs is in my opinion only enough to conclude that the phenomenon is real, whatever it is. From that basic conclusion to determining the origin of the phenomenon (or multiple phenomena?) is quite a big leap in my opinion. One I am not willing to make at this point in time. I don’t see enough evidence to make a more decisive conclusion than that.


My point is: If they have perfected traveling such great distances why do they crash here so frequently when they must have achieved such a tremendously high level of technology? We hear stories of ETs coming here and crashing when they are targeted by our technology. Presumably the difference in technology between our two civilizations would be astronomical. We might as well be throwing rocks at them, and still somehow they come crashing down.


I am certainly no expert but I would imagine that it’s quite a big difference between traveling within our own solar system, something we have barely mastered at this point, and traveling between star systems like ETs presumably would have to do.

 

[dmanister]

if we're not yet a Type 1 civilization then i would suspect that the scales of information that could be gathered by drones from Type 2 and Type 3 civilizations would be so substantially distant from each other that we could not yet begin to comprehend what they were gathering nor how they were gathering it.

Agreed about Mike, he is entirely offbeat and sincerely passionate about his experiences. You can't fault him for his enthusiasm or his very create engagement with his subject matter. A lot of his methodology strikes me as more anecdotal, and are even meditations sometimes on different features of the abduction narrative. Synchronicities and owls seem to figure prominently amongst other touchstones. He is very interesting to listen too, especially once you've adapted to his audio edit cue that frequently can repeat.

Robert if we can achieve a soft landing on a speeding asteroid, does it make any sense at all that more technologically advanced space travelers would crash on a planet, not rarely but frequently?

TOUCHDOWN! ROSETTA’S PHILAE PROBE LANDS ON COMET
On 12 November 2014 the European Space Agency Rosetta mission soft-landed its Philae probe on the surface of a speeding comet, 317 million miles from earth.

Touchdown! Rosetta’s Philae probe lands on comet / Rosetta / Space Science / Our Activities / ESA

 

[dmanister]

As for Mike, I've heard every one of his podcasts and enjoyed them. He's a very talented artist, and like many creative thinkers he can consider possibilities most people never imagine. He's not enamored with my critiques of his research technique however.

 

[Robert Baird]

If Dolan makes money going along with some things that turn out to be frauds he is not much different than most people. He has his insights on things and became a VIP due to those insights and his writing. He does not become all at once an expert in NLP and mind control transmissions from DIA backed Persinger etc. There are numerous areas of expertise involved in what is called Ufology. I think many are long standing archetypes of cultural brainwashing such as the Bible and other religions have supported in order to be interpreters for G-ds, boogeymen and aliens. The propulsion, technology and science including possible back-engineering of Earth Nations competing in Black Ops may be his forte but even it has elements that Black Ops personnel are not informed about - need to know and Plausible Deniability built in. He might even have fallen prey to the Plausible Deniability counter-intel which we know goes on with Lazar and Co-intelpro.

Few people can grasp the physics or astrophysical fields including Gravitational Wave Theory which is presently proving metaphysical and mystical CONTACT potential, contact of a sort including attunements through spacetime from other parts of universe in other dimensions.

Jung is a similar example we can learn from and yet know he was not always right or any number of things the imagination and hallucinatory genre has devised with a pinch of ego and stubbornness which gets exacerbated by personal attacks.

I posted the following on another Dolan thread here. I think what the Russians say and which I double quote is what everyone has to take into their thinking before rational discourse and actual sharing will lead to some useful outcome from this whole genre.

Dolan has a lot of merit, for certain.

I mentioned the research captured from the Japanese at the end of WWII. Here you can see the nature of why weapons in space have a serious future impact on your life. In fact they can target a mailbox and read it, and they could do that many years ago. YOU should know if you do something they really do not like they can eliminate YOU. You might ask why they do not use space weapons in the Middle East or to assassinate certain people. I will be happy to explain why, starting with de-stabilization has been their goal in that region since Israel was created. Decades ago I knew they had accurate lasers in space that could burn a 200 foot deep hole in the Earth. Now it is far worse.

They did use minor psy-ops on a bunker full of Saddam's men. That bunker was huge, had tanks and such. It was built by Germans who knew about space based lasers. After two weeks of microwave or rudimentary machines like used at Ruby Ridge or Waco; the elite fighting force of Iraq surrendered without a shot being fired.

Toward a Psycho-Civilized Society by David G. Guyatt

I mentioned Kucinich and the Russian's unsuccessful attempts to stop space based mind control and death rays etc.

"In 1993, Defense News announced that the Russian government was discussing with American counterparts the transfer of technical information and equipment known as "Acoustic Psycho-correction." The Russians claimed that this device involves "the transmission of specific commands via static or white noise bands into the human subconscious without upsetting other intellectual functions." Experts said that demonstrations of this equipment have shown "encouraging" results "after exposure of less than one minute," and has produced "the ability to alter behavior on willing and unwilling subjects." The article goes on to explain that combined "software and hardware associated with the (sic) psycho-correction program could be procured for as little as U.S. $80,000." The Russians went on to observe that "World opinion is not ready for dealing appropriately with the problems coming from the possibility of direct access to the human mind." "

I am tempted to post a thread here titled - Idiots are the Reason Humanity is Doomed. And because people here do not read "Encyclopedias of information" (to quote one person here in reference to my work - and she actually reads more than anyone else as far as I can see), and only put this one little remark from Guyatt's excellent research from a long time ago.

"Experts said that demonstrations of this equipment have shown "encouraging" results "after exposure of less than one minute," and has produced "the ability to alter behavior on willing and unwilling subjects." The article goes on to explain that combined "software and hardware associated with the (sic) psycho-correction program could be procured for as little as U.S. $80,000." The Russians went on to observe that "World opinion is not ready for dealing appropriately with the problems coming from the possibility of direct access to the human mind.""

 

[Burnt State]

Robert if we can achieve a soft landing on a speeding asteroid, does it make any sense at all that more technologically advanced space travelers would crash on a planet, not rarely but frequently?

No, it makes no sense at all outside of dumb chance. I wasn't doubting that criticism, just pointing out that our own technologies are excruciatingly far behind other possible space faring civilizations, especially if they are faring in our direction. We are nowhere close to the skills that they have acquired making our sticks and stones stuff pretty low end. That we have the ability to complete such marvelous "sticks and stones" touchdowns is only watered down by the great number of crashes that have rendered many of our own space missions incomplete. We are still fairly limited in terms of what we can get up to.

But yes, one must consider that the likelihood of one alien craft crashing here due to chance is quite small and that multiple crashes would represent possibly profound alien inadequacies and paradoxes such as: extreme short-sightedness, a willingness to waste incredible amounts resources, stupidity, a lack of communication amongst diverse species etc...what's more likely is that there have been no crashes at all, or perhaps one. Though, as Clark has pointed out, historically, the notion of an alien ship crashing on earth being kept secret, is absolutely impossible. As he says, you just can't hide such things from history. It doesn't matter how well the military or any black ops group has things compartmentalized, such an event is simply too large for it to remain hidden from human history for any real length of time, rendering most conspiracy theories around the disclosure movement to be mostly a waste of time.

 

[Constance]

It doesn't matter how well the military or any black ops group has things compartmentalized, such an event is simply too large for it to remain hidden from human history for any real length of time, rendering most conspiracy theories around the disclosure movement to be mostly a waste of time.

But the event of the modern ufo phenomenon hasn't remained hidden, nor has the postulated ETH developed only gradually over the last 65+ years. The latter was proposed and weighed by the US Air Force and its Intelligence branches from the outset in 1947, and has never been overcome as a possible [indeed probable] explanation for a succession of ufo encounters and events since then. The evidence that many ufos are physical, high tech, intelligently operated manifestations of an intelligence other than our own has long been manifest. That the psychological and even psychical effects of ufo encounters constitute another approach to understanding what 'ufos' are does not invalidate the ETH as an explanation for much of the phenomenon in our time and in our planet's past.

Insofar as whether ufo crashes have occurred, why wouldn't they? Do we imagine that older species capable of traveling in space must have become all-powerful and infallible? The physical forces and fields such species must navigate and even manipulate are immense, so immense as to dwarf any organically evolved (or even artificially developed) 'beings' and their technologies.