• 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!

Ray Stanford -- January 15, 2012

Forums New posts
Gene Steinberg

Gene Steinberg

Forum Super Hero
Staff member
As usual, Stanford is an endlessly fascinating guest, whether you agree with him or not. Feel free to post your pro and con comments about the episode here.
 
I liked the episode a lot. I did want to point out to Chris about the painting I commented on in the questions thread. I posted a hi-res link of the image where you can clearly see it's angels. Also, the beam is common in annunciation iconography. I'd like to think I know what I'm talking about when it comes to this.
Too bad we still don't have a way of seeing the up-close images that Stanford apparently has. He was a great guess and I hope it sparks a lot of discussion in here!
 
A great show. Ray's stories are fascinating. I think the intelligence operative's suggestion that non-terrestrial human agents could be carrying on operations on Earth, even infiltrating organizations investigating UFOs, has to have been considered a possibility by Intelligence IF the US military took UFOs seriously. I can only imagine how incredibly uncomfortable considering and discussing such a possibility must have been. Talk about a paranoia inducing notion.
 
I also want to say that after listening to Ray explain why he hasn't released his UFO data yet, it makes perfect sense and he is being perfectly reasonable in insisting that there is a big difference between how the release of science and entertainment are handled.
 
trainedobserver said:
I also want to say that after listening to Ray explain why he hasn't released his UFO data yet, it makes perfect sense and he is being perfectly reasonable in insisting that there is a big difference between how the release of science and entertainment are handled.
Click to expand...
If Ray Stanford is waiting to have the evidence published in scientific journals he better have himself cryogenically frozen or secret the evidence away in a time capsule. No funding is available for UFO research outside the Military Industrial Complex. Nobody wants to jeopardize funding or their careers. How can we expect the scientific community to take the subject seriously without having any evidence? Private citizens and/or organizations will have to collect the evidence because the scientific community is not going to do it. If Stanford is not prepared to publish whatever he has; he shouldn't have made it public. If UFO activity continues to increase perhaps some event will force the scientific community to take the subject seriously in our lifetime. Who Knows?
 
I can see why the PTB would want things to be the way they are now, These things run circles around our current military technology, it makes perfect sense to A: research from within the secrecy of a military science setting, and B:discourage the same from outside the secrecy net.

The nation that can copy this stuff, can literally take over the world.

From a military pov, you want to A: have this stuff, and B: make sure no one else does before you do.

I enjoyed the episode, Mr Stanford is clearly a dedicated and seasoned researcher in this field.

Ive heard Bill Chalker talk about angel hair here down under

http://project1947.com/forum/bcangel.htm
 
mike said:
I can see why the PTB would want things to be the way they are now, These things run circles around our current military technology, it makes perfect sense to A: research from within the secrecy of a military science setting, and B:discourage the same from outside the secrecy net.

The nation that can copy this stuff, can literally take over the world.

From a military pov, you want to A: have this stuff, and B: make sure no one else does before you do.

I enjoyed the episode, Mr Stanford is clearly a dedicated and seasoned researcher in this field.

Ive heard Bill Chalker talk about angel hair here down under

http://project1947.com/forum/bcangel.htm
Click to expand...
Ah! The wild card is that the PTB have no control over these beings!
 
mike said:
Indeed, and the first nation state to copy them, will likewise be beyond the control of all the other nation states here
Click to expand...
Assuming the military actually has one of these craft in their possession; that doesn't necessarily mean we have the technology to replicate them. I'm so sick of hearing about Roswell.How do we know Roswell wasn't a psi-ops to make the Russians believe we had captured a flying saucer? In any case, I believe it's highly probable that we would not be able t0 reproduce the technology. Sure, it's possible, but not certain.
 
I'm of the mind any technological artifact can be copied, given the time and knowledge.
Just looking at how these craft can outrun ours, and allegedly shut down silo sites, would be enough to make any military want the posess that ability.
Imo, discouraging any scientists operating outside the secrecy bubble, would also be a part of ensuring you are the first to acheive that ability
 
mike said:
I'm of the mind any technological artifact can be copied, given the time and knowledge.
Just looking at how these craft can outrun ours, and allegedly shut down silo sites, would be enough to make any military want the posess that ability.
Imo, discouraging any scientists operating outside the secrecy bubble, would also be a part of ensuring you are the first to acheive that ability
Click to expand...
It takes technology to create technology. Look at the infrastructure and technology required to produce automobiles. All I'm saying is we may not be technologically advanced enough to replicate them. I agree with your assessment of their mindset. It wouldn't be surprised to learn there are black projects developing weapons to use against them. It's like Arthur C. Clarke said: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
 
Voyager said:
It takes technology to create technology. Look at the infrastructure and technology required to produce automobiles. All I'm saying is we may not be technologically advanced enough to replicate them. I agree with your assessment of their mindset. It wouldn't be surprised to learn there are black projects developing weapons to use against them. It's like Arthur C. Clarke said: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Click to expand...

Clarke's quote is one of my favourites, but to me the word indistinguisable relates to appearance not function.
That is to say while it may "look" like magic, its not actually magic at all.
To me the universe is a complex set of mechanisms, each and every one of them can, imo be broken down and understood.
To me concepts like magic are those gap fillers, words we use to describe a mechanism we dont yet understand.
Thus i dont think Clarke meant that an advanced technology was magic, but just that it would appear to be to those who didnt understand the mechanism.
 
True magic does not exist. I can tell you based on my observations of one type of UFO, the spheres; when you see them traveling through the atmosphere using some form of field propulsion, and witness the fluctuating energy fields surrounding them, you think it looks magical!
 
Voyager said:
True magic does not exist. I can tell you based on my observations of one type of UFO, the spheres; when you see them traveling through the atmosphere using some form of field propulsion, and witness the fluctuating energy fields surrounding them, you think it looks magical!
Click to expand...

200 years ago, the only "jargon" that could have been used would have been words like magic.
Today we use langauge like field propulsion and fluctuating energy fields.

We may not yet be capable of copying this tech, but the gap is closing
 
mike said:
200 years ago, the only "jargon" that could have been used would have been words like magic.
Today we use langauge like field propulsion and fluctuating energy fields.

We may not yet be capable of copying this tech, but the gap is closing
Click to expand...
I didn't listen to the show with Ray Stanford until today. I liked the segment about Greer. Most radio show hosts are so condescending, promoting charlatans. It's refreshing to hear people tell it like it is. I must say, they only made one Ray Standford, and then broke the mold. He is a character, for sure! I don't agree with all of his conclusions, but I would rather compare notes than quibble over details. I enjoyed the show.
 
I'm enjoying the interview with Ray Sanford. I must say, I'm impressed with his scientific methodicalness. I'm also really impressed that his work has made it to the Smithsonian. He's on the ball.
 
wwkirk said:
I'm enjoying the interview with Ray Sanford. I must say, I'm impressed with his scientific methodicalness. I'm also really impressed that his work has made it to the Smithsonian. He's on the ball.
Click to expand...
What work made it to the Smithsonian?
 
Back
Top