-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, 11 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!
What are you reading?
- Thread starter Red
- Start date
Free episodes:
In her appearance on our December 29, 2024 episode, Elly Flippen, Swann's niece, covers that book during her conversation with us.
BombPopCaper
Skilled Investigator
I'm not currently reading any UFO or paranormal adjacent material as a lot of the historical fiction novels I've had on my shelf have been calling my name. I'm currently reading Sacajawea by Anna Lee Waldo. I've always enjoyed history written as a novel although the accuracy is always something to be skeptical of.
Richard Hawkins
Paranormal Adept
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
BS — I didn't "hijack" anything. I'm actually reading what I post.
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not legitimate.
So this is a duplicate thread to this one: Whatcha reading, listening to, thinking about?
They should be merged, or the title of one of them should be changed to something topic specific.
Last edited:
Burnt State
Paranormal Adept
Richard Hawkins
Paranormal Adept
There you go Randall causing trouble again. Honestly you sophisticated Americans or Canadian's as you are better known.
Burnt State
Paranormal Adept
It's not a subject that is very tangible at all. It's hard to grasp or even understand when we are looking at or participating in a high strange event. Consequently, I read a lot of material from Academia.edu that is adjacent to or directly concerning the phenomenon.
Currently I'm reading:
Event structure in perception and conception.
By Barbara TverskyBecause I know that when we see something strange out brain works really hard on our behalf to try to categorize things we see that fit into the unknown and then we fill in the gaps in time, texture, shapes and forms to try and present us with something we can recognize.
What I haven't yet read are any studies that can help explain how it is events with multiple witnesses may produce something recognizable and familiar, while another witness is seeing something absolutely impossible, and then a third can't see anything at all. Is that genetic, specific to the experiential/cultural training of the individual, or is there some other reason why events are simply not common from person to person. Donald Hoffman addresses this in proving that reality is an individual experience but it still doesn't explain why people can see such vastly different content during a high strange event experience. Anyone got any literature on that?
Red
Paranormal Adept
Whatever Randall. Go kick rocks.
Red
Paranormal Adept
Part of the issue is that we construct the memory anew every time we access it. It is never a static file that gets stored in our brains.
This may help with that a little:
Why Two People See the Same Thing But Have Different Memories
Researchers investigate why two people who experience the same event often have different memories of what occurred.
neurosciencenews.com
I do know that there have been a number of studies to help improve the accuracy of witness recall in law enforcement settings, but I don't know how relevant that is to the threads you are following right now.
Red
Paranormal Adept
I'll keep you posted. It looks intriguing.
Your ruminations on memory remind me that I usually give Julian Jaynes a re-read every once in a while. I've been thinking I need to do that as I recently finished a couple of audio lectures on the ancient histories of Mesopotamia and Egypt. Jaynes posits that the consciousness that we as individuals have today is a direct outgrowth of mastering complex written language. It's an intriguing and interesting hypothesis of how we got from there to here.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Part of the issue is that we construct the memory anew every time we access it. It is never a static file that gets stored in our brains.
This may help with that a little:
Why Two People See the Same Thing But Have Different Memories
Researchers investigate why two people who experience the same event often have different memories of what occurred.
I do know that there have been a number of studies to help improve the accuracy of witness recall in law enforcement settings, but I don't know how relevant that is to the threads you are following right now.
News Flash: Computer memory is also stored in fragments that are constructed every time they're recalled, and I've seen them fail far more often. Multiple types of cameras can also record different details even if they're focused on the same scene — depending on their settings. Those human frailty tests are also typocally setup to exploit known weaknesses. We could the same thing with different memory types and cameras too.
The truth is that normally functioning human perception and memory is highly reliable, with intelligent reconstruction that can identify errors. While it might not get every detail right every time, it rarely fails to the point of being so gossly innacurate that it can't tell the difference between things it's looking at or recall the essential information accurately enough.
Not to mention how easily modern pictures and videos can be faked — the equivalent of "implanted memories". These days, I'd probably believe a reliable firsthand witness before a photo or video posted by anyone, including the PTB ( maybe especially the PTB ). However, as corroborating evidence, stuff like photos, radar tracks, and video are definitly nice-to-haves.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Happy to — in your direction. If you didn't want that — then you shouldn't have kicked first.
Or maybe you forgot how easy it is here to stick your head in the sand — it's called the "ignore button".
Now back to business . . . a free PDF
From LNP to Antenna: How Lipid Nanoparticles
Delivered the Graphene Payload, Transmuting the
Body into a Permanent Network Node
Independent researchers have replicated the Faraday cage experiments and
confirmed that the signal originates from the body, not from any external device.
The BlueFang community has amassed thousands of logs, each with a unique
MAC address, each tied to an injection date and batch number.
Last edited:
Red
Paranormal Adept
Already done. And poof, the biggest bore in the forum is gone.
.