• 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!

April 22, 2012 -- Nancy Talbott

Forums New posts
Burnt State said:
As continuous as this appears there are lots of moments to create a nice clean edit between the 'look, no pictures on the camera sequence' to the spirit photography moments when he plays back what he's taken. Good hoaxing just takes some good work. It's not hard to keep a tripod in place, swap cards in the camera and return to that first image for the edit.
Click to expand...

Something else i found odd, you can see the light wash on robberts face as he takes the photos, one presumes as is normal with these camera's the picture taken is displayed as you take them.
Yet its only when he reviews the shots with the witness that he shows surprise, and recognises Delgardo.....
You would think that when the first photo taken with Pats facing showing came up during the shooting sequence he would have registered some emotion, but he doesnt

I would have liked to see an over the shoulder capture of the camera as well
 
Ive had a look at images of pat delgardo for a match to the one in the clip
his hair line changes from shot to shot, but it match's pretty close in the vid below.
The light reflecting on his glasses seems close too, the pic on robberts camera could easily be a still from this video
When they zoom in on the spirit pic of Pat, the same lense in the glasses seems to be reflecting light


the hairline and relection in glasses is a close match

patdelgado.jpg


if you check the images here
pat delgardo crop circles - Bing Images

You wont find a better match for the hairline
 
Now here is an interesting comment on the comments section of another video

during filming, nothing that appears can be seen on the LCD screen, only afterwards.His friend Stan then feels the obligation to state that although it might look fake or could easily have been faked, it really is not.He himself has been a mentalist and a magician for some time and on top of that considers himself a sceptic So he knows every trick in the book.
Click to expand...

So Robberts friend Stan is a mentalist and magician........... who states

could easily have been faked

Bob's got a friend who knows every trick in the book and who could easily fake these pics ?
 
There was a dutch 'paracastian'(?) a few years ago that disassembled Robbert better than we can hope to do. Tv Shows etc. Since I read all that, I don't trust the judgment of Miss Talbott one bit.
 
Digital Trickster said:
I cant wait to hear him him try to explain these photos.I also dont think that because we all question him means that Chris needs to think that we are doubting how hard and how much work Nancy has contributed to Ufology.I have heard many times Chris state that we should do the research and question things in this field and we have and many of us have decided that these photos are clearly BS .If they arent then Robert and Nancy will have the chance to prove us wrong .I dont need to be an expert in photography to know that Billys pics were fake and have the feeling that the same applies to this case as well. Cant wait for this episode Im sure it will be a classic!
Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry about hurting Christopher's feelings here. He consistently praises the "hard work", "research" and "contributions" of a number of liars, frauds, and at best (benefit of the doubt shouldn't be given)---extremely gullible people. I recall how concerned he was that Rosemary Ellen Guiley's reputation as a credible researcher would be tarnished by her association with Phil Imbrogno after Lance exposed him. That is really rich considering her "research" is total bullshit. Don't worry about offending Chris. These are the circles he runs in---pun intended because this topic is pathetic.
 
dyingsun said:
Lauren, care to tell us how Guileys research is bullshit? Thanks in Advance.
Click to expand...

Not really. If you have any doubts, perhaps you should Ask The Angels. Rosemary has written the definitive guide based on her research and personal experience. Here's a preview from her own web site:

A lovely and inspired practical guide to bring the angelic presence into your life. Rosemary draws on her research and her personal experience in a beautiful work intended to foster a close connection to the angelic realm for personal enlightenment and spiritual guidance. She explains a program for advancing up the “Ladder of Angels” to experience the different hierarchies, and provides meditation guides for working with the 22 Master Angels of Life, higher vibrational beings who hold the potential for profound insights and healing.

 
Ladder of Angels” to experience the different hierarchies, and provides meditation guides for working with the 22 Master Angels of Life, higher vibrational beings who hold the potential for profound insights and healing.

Well, does it work? ;)
 
Someday we will capture spaceman spiff in the act of passing people through walls and roofs and confiscate his butt f...ing instruments. Until then, stay tuned for more "Saucer mysteries." :p
 
To be fair, I don't put Rosemary Ellen Guiley in the fraud category. She's essentially a "pop paranormal" professional author and there's nothing wrong with that in itself. My only issue is when people speak of pop research/work in serious tones and seem to expect that the work be given weight/respected in a rational context.
 
It's funny because I'm not a materialist. But, I am a born skeptic. I am skeptical of everybody from my own experience to Richard Dawkins to John Mack to just about everything. I do have certain core beliefs and values and I don't stick my finger in the air every morning to see which way the wind is blowing. But, I do keep a healthy skepticism about most things. Hope and skepticism at the same time. That and a sense of humor. Don't leave home without em. ;)
 
I just have to say that listening to this show and looking at Robbert's photos at the same time almost made me embarrassed to have an interest in the paranormal.

The Meier influence is so clear in so many of his so-called UFO photos, it's laughable.
 
mikeclr said:
I just have to say that listening to this show and looking at Robbert's photos at the same time almost made me embarrassed to have an interest in the paranormal.

The Meier influence is so clear in so many of his so-called UFO photos, it's laughable.
Click to expand...

What galls me is the pseudo-spirituality (love, peace, communication with the dead, spiritual awaking, etc., etc.) aspect which is an attempt to possess some moral high ground in the face of the obviously faked photographs. It's definitely a "Let me piss on your leg and tell you it's raining." type of feeling that I get from it. The whole thing would actually be funny if it weren't for that.
 
Back
Top