• SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, five years young! For a low subscription fee, you will be able to download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast 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! For a limited time, you can save up to 40% on your subscription. Long-term susbcribers will receive free Amazon gift cards. It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Alien contacts / critical point of view



Irreligious Survivalist

Skilled Investigator
Irreligious Survivalist said:
... as one who has intimate contact with hundreds of other experiencers ...

Oh my, intimate contact, and with no less than hundreds. Was this sort of a Vulcan mind meld thing, or more like a hand laying ceremony with you as the head guru?

No less, yes. Face-to-face. I am flattered that you would think I am a guru but I shrink back from such admiration.
 

Ron Away

Paranormal Adept
Irreligious Survivalist said:
Think? As an experiencer, as one who has actually reviewed the FREE data surveys, as one who has intimate contact with hundreds of other experiencers, as one who understands the deep emotional and spiritual makeovers many experiencers are subjected, as one who fully appreciates the mental processing and phasing of the ET contact-experience. I know the reality of the ET contact-experience.

And it has little to nothing to do with being mentally deficient, quite the opposite, as anyone with a reasonable approach to the subject and only a bit of my information could also comprehend.



Did I just not?
No
 

Thomas R Morrison

Paranormal Adept
AFOSI operative? Former? Are you certain, Tommy? Are you? Have you jumped to several conclusions based upon nothing but bridging from this bit of misinformation to the next? This could be very embarrassing for you, be sure, man, be sure!
You know that Gene has all of the IP address logs and can run a quick comparison to prove that it's you, right?
 
Last edited:

S.R.L.

Paranormal Adept
Think? As an experiencer, as one who has actually reviewed the FREE data surveys, as one who has intimate contact with hundreds of other experiencers, as one who understands the deep emotional and spiritual makeovers many experiencers are subjected, as one who fully appreciates the mental processing and phasing of the ET contact-experience. I know the reality of the ET contact-experience.

And it has little to nothing to do with being mentally deficient, quite the opposite, as anyone with a reasonable approach to the subject and only a bit of my information could also comprehend.
Have you ever visited this website?

Who Doesn't Like Aliens?
 

S.R.L.

Paranormal Adept
I most assuredly am not your "buddy"
You're not anyone's buddy, as posting your escapades here as well. You sure as hell get around ...

Shen1987, Irreligious Survivalist, or, The Irreligious Survivalist, you are absolutely 100% correct as you are not Walter Bosley. I read that banned Paracast & AfterLifeForums forum member Waller Joel stole your username in the attempt of smearing your online reputation.

Talk:MU (internet troll) - RationalWiki

Who is Waller Joel?

The Vertical Plane

Who Doesn't Like Aliens?

Who Doesn't Like Aliens?

The question now becomes, are you (A) Waller Joel posing as Irreligious Survivalist in continuing to smear (B) Irreligious Survivalist (C) none of the above?

Inasmuch as Walter Bosley is understandably pissed, I believe I know the answer, but these super sleuths in helping to create the mess can now sort it out.

To the real Walter Bosley: if you so happen to find this post.., well, here's the old man who's been screwing w/you.
May I present.., super troll...
Waller *
Then again, who is to tell when dealing with potential insanity?
6a01a5117102a7970c01a73dc5cd63970d-200wi
 
Last edited:

Thomas R Morrison

Paranormal Adept
I've been in New Mexico for nine days with only my iPhone (not my laptop) and had none of my forum passwords with me. Just got back tonight. :)
You're a hell of a good sport about this, Walter Bosley.

Perhaps the most deranged psychopathic troll on the entire internet deliberately framed you to take the blame for the trolling that he came here to do, and I fell for it because in the 20 years that I've been participating in online chat boards, I've never run into anything even remotely as Mad-Hatter crazy as this guy. I still have no idea why he set you up, but I assume that it was a combination of blind random insanity and the fact that he prefers to screw with people who use their real names on the internet because he can cause more damage, chaos, and consternation that way.

I should've known that sooner or later I'd run across a wickedly diabolical Moriarty troll - in retrospect I realize that it was a statistical inevitably. But to my credit, once I saw that we were dealing with a truly demonic personage with an entirely novel form of online trolling paraphilia (perhaps a new entry for the upcoming DSM VI), I immediately realized that you were incapable of his level of malignant psychopathology and we quickly identified him as the infamous and widely despised "Waller Joel" troll, thanks to S.R.I.'s excellent online sleuthing skills.

Sorry for the BS, and welcome back!
 

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
Really good short survey. What are your thoughts on this ?
I like TED videos, but there is a darker side to the operation. They claim to be non-partisan, and their guidelines for speakers clearly say to avoid "us vs. them language" yet they also clearly say to "avoid pseudoscience" and give skeptics like Shermer the floor. So clearly the subjects aren't off limits so long as they're being bashed. If TED were truly non-partisan then they'd allow objective coverage of any subject. They don't. Instead they are openly biased against certain subjects deemed to be hazardous to their cozy relationship with the scientific community, including scientific skeptics ( like Shermer ). Unfortunately that means they allow bad ideas so long as it's from the right group of people, and allow the "us vs. them language" to be presented only by one side of the issue. Is that fair? Is it intellectually honest? I don't think so. This is really too bad because TED is an otherwise excellent platform for sharing ideas.
 
Last edited:

The Starman

Paranormal Maven
I like TED videos, but there is a darker side to the operation. They claim to be non-partisan, and their guidelines for speakers clearly say to avoid "us vs. them language" yet they also clearly say to "avoid pseudoscience" and give skeptics like Shermer the floor. So clearly the subjects aren't off limits so long as they're being bashed. If TED were truly non-partisan then they'd allow objective coverage of any subject. They don't. Instead they are openly biased against certain subjects deemed to be hazardous to their cozy relationship with the scientific community, including scientific skeptics ( like Shermer ). Unfortunately that means they allow bad ideas so long as it's from the right group of people, and allow the "us vs. them language" to be presented only by one side of the issue. Is that fair? Is it intellectually honest? I don't think so. This is really too bad because TED is an otherwise excellent platform for sharing ideas.
I don't get it what are trying to say. TED don't allow pseodo people to talk or what ?

I think TED is a good making machine with strange politics. They exploit people, they don't pay to speakers. BUT there are good talks.

This guys tells, what is happening inside.
 
Last edited:

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
I don't get it what are trying to say. TED don't allow pseodo people to talk or what ? I think TED is a good making machine with strange politics. They exploit people, they don't pay to speakers. BUT there are good talks. This guys tells, what is happening inside.
Interesting video. Thanks for that.

QUOTE: TEDx Rules
  • Avoid pseudoscience. TED and TEDx are platforms for showcasing and explaining genuine advances in science, and it's important we retain the respect of the scientific community. Speakers should avoid the misuse of scientific language to make unsubstantiated claims.
    • No talks with an inflammatory political or religious agenda, nor for polarizing “us vs them” language. We seek to build consensus and provide outside-the-box thinking, not to revisit familiar, unresolvable disputes on these topics.
 

The Starman

Paranormal Maven
Interesting video. Thanks for that.
Welcome.

QUOTE: TEDx Rules
  • Avoid pseudoscience. TED and TEDx are platforms for showcasing and explaining genuine advances in science, and it's important we retain the respect of the scientific community. Speakers should avoid the misuse of scientific language to make unsubstantiated claims.
    • No talks with an inflammatory political or religious agenda, nor for polarizing “us vs them” language. We seek to build consensus and provide outside-the-box thinking, not to revisit familiar, unresolvable disputes on these topics.


    • So it is a good or bad thing to no allow pseudoscientists talk in TED anymore ?
 

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
Welcome. So it is a good or bad thing to no allow pseudoscientists talk in TED anymore ?

It's not that simple. It appears to me as if the TED people ( whoever made the "avoid pseudoscience" rule quoted above ), aren't applying the pseudoscience label fair-mindedly because of politics in the scientific community, particularly from the scientific skeptics. So if a skeptic calls something pseudoscience, it doesn't seem to matter to the TED people whether or not it's actually true. Just the label is enough to distance the TED people from the subject in order to stay on cozy terms with the scientific skeptics.

Such is the influence of scientific skeptics within a certain segment of the scientific community. If the TED people were fair-minded rather than biased, they'd allow objective talks on scientifically contentious topics because that's where the most imaginative cutting edge stuff is, and that's where the really new advancements are going to come from. Not from what we already know. It's a shame that a guy like David Fravor, the Navy pilot who personally intercepted a UFO in an F-18 cannot describe that event in an objective fashion at a TED event. It is of tremendous technological significance, but the TED people would sooner "avoid" it.
 

The Starman

Paranormal Maven
It's not that simple. It appears to me as if the TED people ( whoever made the "avoid pseudoscience" rule quoted above ), aren't applying the pseudoscience label fair-mindedly because of politics in the scientific community, particularly from the scientific skeptics. So if a skeptic calls something pseudoscience, it doesn't seem to matter to the TED people whether or not it's actually true. Just the label is enough to distance the TED people from the subject in order to stay on cozy terms with the scientific skeptics.

Such is the influence of scientific skeptics within a certain segment of the scientific community. If the TED people were fair-minded rather than biased, they'd allow objective talks on scientifically contentious topics because that's where the most imaginative cutting edge stuff is, and that's where the really new advancements are going to come from. Not from what we already know. It's a shame that a guy like David Fravor, the Navy pilot who personally intercepted a UFO in an F-18 cannot describe that event in an objective fashion at a TED event. It is of tremendous technological significance, but the TED people would sooner "avoid" it.
I don't see any problem if TED not allowing anymore pseudoscience topics participate (if that is the case). That is their own decission, it's a private company. There are plenty other patforms to speak about ghosts, aliens, paranormal activities...especially ufology it has own conferences and big following group. It's very easy to put a victim label on UFO subject and then look for perpetrator as government, science skeptics or whatever.
 

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
I don't see any problem if TED not allowing anymore pseudoscience topics participate (if that is the case). That is their own decission, it's a private company. There are plenty other patforms to speak about ghosts, aliens, paranormal activities...especially ufology it has own conferences and big following group. It's very easy to put a victim label on UFO subject and then look for perpetrator as government, science skeptics or whatever.
Just because a private company and its supporters have a right to operate on biased unsubstantiated bigoted points of view doesn't mean there's no problem with it. Also, the blame the victim mentality doesn't wash with me at all.
 

Top