April 4th show - Hopkins, Randle & Jacobs

[Gene Steinberg]

Just a reality check: Jacobs says he did NOT know she was taping those segments, nor did he give her permission to do so.

Maybe his online response isn't true — but how can you prove that?

 

[paraschtick]

Just a reality check: Jacobs says he did NOT know she was taping those segments, nor did he give her permission to do so.

Maybe his online response isn't true — but how can you prove that?

I believe the audio files Emma has are not edited except for deletion of names and personal information ... and we can probably argue until we're blue in the face that they are or are not authentic and haven't been tampered in any way. I have looked at them myself in a wave editor program, and cannot believe they were. I have said it before that it would have been a herculean task to do put something like that together. So until it is proven otherwise, I shall believe (arghh hate that term) that the audio files she has posted on her site are exactly what she says they are.

On audio file 8, I believe it is, you can clearly hear Dr Jacobs attempt to record the conversation. If what she is doing by recording the conversation (and at one point she states clearly to him that she told him in the past that she was going to record the conversations ... to which he replies that he had forgotten or didn't remember her saying this ... which goes along with his statement that he has a terrible memory and forgets pretty much anything anyone says to him) is illegal, then he must be doing something illegal too by taping the conversation. He doesn't even ask her (if I remember correctly ... might have to listen to it again) to do so.

So I guess again it all comes down to who you are going to believe. Someone who has illegally (and I believe there is no question about this) planted false memories/notions of Multiple Personality Disorder under no licence to do so, and has talked about receiving Instant Messages from Alien Hybrids ... or someone who under in a vulnerable state was hypnotised over the phone by said "researcher", tried to come to some sort of agreement over the whole situation in a considerate and thoughtful fashion but is instead being attacked for being mentally unstable ... which if you read and listen to her material is far from the truth.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Without having analyzed the audio files, I think it's fair to say that a low resolution audio file has lots of background noise with which to filter edits. It would probably require some sort of expert or forensic analysis to see if there are any changes. It doesn't require much skill to just cut and paste waveforms.

Regardless, I suppose if someone wanted to take the time to do a proper analysis, and had the background to pull it off, it would be interesting to see what they determine.

 

[redheadnation]

Without having analyzed the audio files, I think it's fair to say that a low resolution audio file has lots of background noise with which to filter edits. It would probably require some sort of expert or forensic analysis to see if there are any changes. It doesn't require much skill to just cut and paste waveforms.

Regardless, I suppose if someone wanted to take the time to do a proper analysis, and had the background to pull it off, it would be interesting to see what they determine.

Gene you have not commented on Jacobs performing hypnosis and hypnosis over the phone. What is your view?

 

[aNorthernSoul]

Without having analyzed the audio files, I think it's fair to say that a low resolution audio file has lots of background noise with which to filter edits. It would probably require some sort of expert or forensic analysis to see if there are any changes. It doesn't require much skill to just cut and paste waveforms.

Regardless, I suppose if someone wanted to take the time to do a proper analysis, and had the background to pull it off, it would be interesting to see what they determine.

Quite the opposite actually.... you need high res audio files to make edits and THEN hide any splicing within the compression... though often compression can amplify anomalies in the sound file. Then, beyond that, you'd need a massive amount of clips in order to splice together sentences in a natural tone. His excuse really doesn't cut it considering there is pretty natural sounding discussion regarding them both recording the conversations. Also, the audio was obtained from recorded conversations either over the phone or the internet. Neither really scream high quality captures to me.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

It depends on the files and how much white background noise lies between sentences. If a hypnotic session I expect slow speech. As to editing words, it's not easy. But taking whole sentences would be a lot simpler.

But how much it is edited isn't my concern. I just don't understand why Jacobs was even sought out or why he ever agreed to participate.

Phone hypnosis? If, as Jacobs says, it's normal practice for therapists, then we should be concerned about more than just one or two UFO abduction researchers.

 

[aNorthernSoul]

You really do need to look at the evidence Emma presented... the conversations that I find the most alarming are not hypnosis, but just conversations between them. And I am right with you on the phone hypnosis thing, but from what I can gather, it sounds like more Jacob's idea than hers.

 

[paraschtick]

But how much it is edited isn't my concern. I just don't understand why Jacobs was even sought out or why he ever agreed to participate.

I think the reason Emma went to Dr Jacobs in the first place was that her psychiatrist refered her to him, and she like alot of us believed him to be above reproach, a reputable hypnotherapist in whom she could place her trust. I have absolutely no problem in that since most of us in a vulnerable state such as the one Emma was in would do exactly the same.

Why Dr Jacobs agreed is another matter. I get the feeling she was just another "research subject" to him, and so he just accepted her willingness to participate in his "research". Everything seemed fine and dandy until Elizabeth came into the mix along with all this very strange talk of alien hybrid instant messages. Something Emma I think acceptedly rather quickly was something very ... fishy, but Dr Jacobs believed to be the real thing.

It was after this that everything broke down ... although Emma tried to come to an amicable break up.

[oh and if anyone wants to really get a feel of Dr Jacobs hypnotic regression technique, one can listen to parts of the hypnosis sessions Emma had with Dr Jacobs at her website. The following is from her second hypnotic session, I believe:

http://www.ufoalienabductee.com/hypnosis-session-2-alien-throat-catheter.mp3

The leading questions in this audio file are there in plain sight. Its quite amazing really, and not like any hypnotic regression I've ever heard. If anyone can prove to me that this is pretty standard for hypnotic regressions then I shall stand corrected.

 

[redheadnation]

It depends on the files and how much white background noise lies between sentences. If a hypnotic session I expect slow speech. As to editing words, it's not easy. But taking whole sentences would be a lot simpler.

But how much it is edited isn't my concern. I just don't understand why Jacobs was even sought out or why he ever agreed to participate.

Phone hypnosis? If, as Jacobs says, it's normal practice for therapists, then we should be concerned about more than just one or two UFO abduction researchers.

Yes you are correct in the fact that there are plenty more "researchers" and others performing hypnosis. I disagree that phone hypnosis is a normal practice. How can he monitor the patient? How could he intervien if she would have a serious reaction such as a catatonic state or severe emotional breakdown? How safe is that?

 

[Experiencer7]

This bugs me too. We've got the whole human, Neanderthal and other species' genome. We've got online medical and biological research, facts and figures about the flora and fauna of Earth...including us. So why would aliens need to come-a-calling nightly taking samples and abducting folk?

* Insemination? Although there's a current shortage...we have sperm banks. We can transplant and store ova...but they can't.
* Blood? We are on the cusp of being able to synthesise blood...but they can't.
* Meat? We're already making synthetic meat...it's in its infancy. Why wouldn't their technology be able to do so?
* Hybrids? They can impregnate a woman and have her gestate to full term in a matter of a couple hours. That's the general claim? Yet they don't have the technology to bypass human parents altogether? Are we the technological peak of surrogacy?!
* Pineal gland milking? Again...are they too dumb to advance past our level of synthesisation?

I'm not a schmuck or a debunker...I'm a skeptic (a work in progress!) and none of the reasons cited by the abduction devotees appeal to my thinking. Maybe we do have visitors from somewhere or other? I can handle the concept and enjoy speculating about why or what or where they could come from. I enjoy it! The Pascagoula Incident (The Pascagoula Abduction Incident - Pascagoula, Mississippi, United States - October 11, 1973 - UFO Evidence) is a favourite...Colares UFO flap of '77 ( ufo - UFOS at close sight: Colares 1977, article by Daniel Rebisso Giese) is a great case to study.

The US-centric mythology of daily mass abductions by nuts & bolts craft that aren't ever seen is, at the very least, open to question. The whole theme appeals to the darkest part of the human psyche...rape, kidnapping, dominance and removal of free will. When I hear or read some accounts...I have to wonder what part of the psyche it comes from?

It's a dark old business for the people claiming to have been abducted...they have my sympathy.

Perhaps imagery is being pulled out of the abductee's mind., to cover what is actually occurring.

 

[aNorthernSoul]

Perhaps imagery is being pulled out of the abductee's mind., to cover what is actually occurring.

Or the hypnotists....

 

[ArchieBedford]

Hang on a sec. Those tapes were as far as I know taped legally. Dr Jacobs knew Emma was taping him all along. At one point on the audio tapes you can hear him trying to set up a tape to record the conversation too ... but he fails for some reason or other. So you cannot say that Emma was illegally taping anything. I would indeed love to see Dr Jacobs release any of the tapes he has to public scrutiny. And I would indeed go through them. He could also do what Emma has done in her tapes and edit out any names and personal information, as long as he admitted to doing so. However I do not believe this will happen. And as for Dr Jacobs being ethical. He implanted false notions of "Multiple Personality Disorder" in Emma ... I do not find that to be ethical in any way shape or form. But then again thats just my opinion and I could be wildly off kilter ... but then again ... I don't really think so Click here to enlarge

Clarification: DJ ALWAYS records, retains and catalogues the actual sessions, whether experiences are being reported from full conscious memory (which for example in my case has been the majority but not necessarily so with everyone) or where hypnosis is used to assist recall. This is part of the agreement you are asked to sign before he consents to work with you. The sessions are meticulously archived, and the experiencer/reporter gets copies of them all.

The issue about legality in this case is not about the mutually agreed recorded memory sessions, which legally constitute "collecting oral history". The issue is that EW telephoned DJ without prior arrangement with great frequency over a long period of time, sometimes more than five times each day, and it seems all these these "non-official" calls (i.e. not part of the prior-arranged reporting sessions and outside their agreement) were illegally recorded by her - for what purpose, you can speculate. Laws exist about the non-disclosure by one party to the other about illicitly recording telephone conversations both in Pennsylvania and in NZ. She now says she once told him she planned to record/might record any phone conversation if she telephoned him, and he agreed. He says no: she never said this, and if she had he would not have consented. It's the material from these (allegedly) illegally recorded telephone conversations, by and large, which (allegedly) has been heavily edited to spin a story and put out all over the internet as the heart of this defamation campaign.

 

[Daktari Impossible]

I'm not sure this was Paracast's best show. I think there was a bit of back-off from iconic fiigures. The use of hypnosis in the practice of standard psychotherapy is controversial. It stands to reason using it for the purpose of extracting abduction memories would be even more so.

I'm afraid I can't countenance the practice of covert operations against hybrid aliens in even a forewarned hypnotic subject, in this case Miss Woods. Number one: You have to accept the reality of hybrid aliens. Number two: You have to accept then that hybrid aliens are a threat. Lastly, you have to accept that these hybrids are out to get David Jacobs. That is asking a great deal.

Now, the narrative possibilities for Jacobs the writer are endless.

And in fact it seems that Miss Woods was indeed to be a featured character in his latest work of fiction, along with Webmaster Smith.

It has probably been pointed out in the forum that Jacobs apparently has changed the content of his "Defamation Campaign" post and that Elizabeth Smith's blog is no longer available, though The Clueless One and Jeff Ritzman have it saved somewhere.

Wayback Machine is worthless. Jacobs has blocked it for his site and Webmaster Smith's blog can't be accessed through it.

When I was in college, I happened to take in a Stage Hypnotist's act. One feature he included was hypnotically suggesting to a subject that she talk in gibberish and then he had another subject translate her gibberish. The translation turned out to be that the gibberish talker was an alien from another world on a mission of peace to Planet Earth.

When Vaeni and Ritzman broke the Emma Woods story, or gave it a larger hearing, the memory of that show came bursting back.

So I'm going to make a nonhypnotic suggestion--already hinted at by Vaeni and Ritzman--that Hopkins and Jacobs are stage hypnotists. The compliance of their subjects with their suggestions supplies them with the material they need for their books. They, I'm contending, as I'm sure others suspect, author their books using the brains of their subjects as blank pages to write on. Of course they're experts on the subject: they have a plethora of inside information.

The question is, is this a conscious racket or something they do out of deep religious faith in extraterrestrials? If it is their deep faith in the existence of these beings that drives them, they would both be candidates for cult leadership status.

As to Jacobs' defamation case, I don't know of any court in the land that would buy his contention he was protecting himself from aliens by implanting a diagnosis of multiple personality disorder, a diagnosis he isn't qualified to make, into Emma Woods brain to throw off the hybrids' mindreading capabilities. He would have to prove the threat and having to prove the threat obligates him to prove that the beings making the threat existed.

I'd love to be in court when Jacobs' lawyer called an alien-human hybrid to the stand.

This isn't counting the fact that recovered memory cases in the courts have tended to go against their validity under normal circumstances. What happens when Aliens are involved?

There apparently is no regulation of the practice of hypnosis in Jacobs' state. Therefore, he doesn't have to deal with licensing or boards of review. So he won't be sanctioned for his behavior. But if Emma brings her case in Pennsylvania, perhaps the State will be inspired to create such boards of review and licensing authorities in order to see to it this type of thing doesn't happen again.

All this doesn't mean all abduction experiences are fabrications. Or that Aliens don't exist. It is more an indictment of hypnosis's role in memory recovery generally and Jacobs personally than it is some watershed rejection of the phenomenon.

 

[Simonemendez]

The US-centric mythology of daily mass abductions by nuts & bolts craft that aren't ever seen is, at the very least, open to question. The whole theme appeals to the darkest part of the human psyche...rape, kidnapping, dominance and removal of free will. When I hear or read some accounts...I have to wonder what part of the psyche it comes from?

Ummmmmmm..........I think that I don't think it's the "psyche" ---part---...

 

[ArizonaWill]

Clarification: DJ ALWAYS records, retains and catalogues the actual sessions, whether experiences are being reported from full conscious memory (which for example in my case has been the majority but not necessarily so with everyone) or where hypnosis is used to assist recall. This is part of the agreement you are asked to sign before he consents to work with you. The sessions are meticulously archived, and the experiencer/reporter gets copies of them all.

The issue about legality in this case is not about the mutually agreed recorded memory sessions, which legally constitute "collecting oral history". The issue is that EW telephoned DJ without prior arrangement with great frequency over a long period of time, sometimes more than five times each day, and it seems all these these "non-official" calls (i.e. not part of the prior-arranged reporting sessions and outside their agreement) were illegally recorded by her - for what purpose, you can speculate. Laws exist about the non-disclosure by one party to the other about illicitly recording telephone conversations both in Pennsylvania and in NZ. She now says she once told him she planned to record/might record any phone conversation if she telephoned him, and he agreed. He says no: she never said this, and if she had he would not have consented. It's the material from these (allegedly) illegally recorded telephone conversations, by and large, which (allegedly) has been heavily edited to spin a story and put out all over the internet as the heart of this defamation campaign.

Others outside the David Jacobs-Budd Hopkins "cult" have spoken eloquently. Therefore, I will not try in any way to equal their logic and objective stance. Nonetheless, I felt compelled to simply say that every time I read one of Archie's posts (where he keeps name dropping DJ and BH's names - they are such close bro's, y'know...comrades in arms against the mainstream reality), my mind automatically brings up the Paracast episode(s) where Michael Horn relentlessly lobbied on behalf of his master Billy Meiers. When you are an admitted member of the "cult", so to speak, why should anyone take your views seriously? The responses to your posts have refuted what you've said on numerous occasions (and one moderator even warned you that you would be banned if you didn't stop the vicious unfounded attacks on Emma Wood's sanity. I would say that the above referenced post is border-line, since it claims without proof that Emma Woods is engaged in a deceptive defamation campaign, seemingly without justification - how like a true believer to respond in this manner).

Yet, like Michael Horn, I realize that you are relentless in your total dedication to your very close pals Dave and Budd. You do realize, I am sure, that you are very proud of being at the A-Table in a very small rather seedy restaurant. This is nothing to be particularly proud of, is it? You boast that you are priviledged to private information about the Emma Woods case? Well, isn't that just dandy! I thought you said that David Jacobs was highly professional and would never divulge client (that is "research subject") information? Yet it seems like you are quite proud that your bro Dave has confided in you about such confidential matters. This is really sleazy.

I was personal friends with a very charismatic minister in 2006. I even volunteered to be his personal assistant with no salary! I had absolute faith in the man. My dedication blinded me to the warning signs that many others tried to show me. I rebuked them, often in condescending terms, as if I was just more spiritually evolved than the naysayers. Their legitimate complaints were transformed by me into "whining" and I questioned their motives.

In 2007 the church board revealed that my precious minister had been having an affair with a congregant's wife and had been "Misallocating" funds from the church. Due to his covert actions, the church itself went into bankruptcy. The minister eventually turned up in Florida, running the same scam yet again. I wouldn't be surprised if he already has an eager beaver assistant also working for no salary.

Sigh....good luck to you Michael, er, I mean Archie.

Note: I am so glad that the powers-that-be on the Paracast are no longer automatically labelling anyone who asks obvious logical questions about the Emma Woods case and the legitimacy of David Jacobs as "shills", "ringers" or (as one moderator put it originally) "bat shit insane". Yet, I still feel that the Paracast is being a bit too deferential to that little cliche at the A-Table. How many times does Gene have to tell us that the Emma Woods tapes could have been altered. He has no evidence this is true, but it is a standard pro-David Jacobs talking point, so let's just keep repeating it ad nauseum.

 

[paraschtick]

...
Note: I am so glad that the powers-that-be on the Paracast are no longer automatically labelling anyone who asks obvious logical questions about the Emma Woods case and the legitimacy of David Jacobs as "shills", "ringers" or (as one moderator put it originally) "bat shit insane". Yet, I still feel that the Paracast is being a bit too deferential to that little cliche at the A-Table. How many times does Gene have to tell us that the Emma Woods tapes could have been altered. He has no evidence this is true, but it is a standard pro-David Jacobs talking point, so let's just keep repeating it ad nauseum.

Couldn't agree more Sir Fastwalker . To me though all this can come down to some simple facts:

Who would you believe?

(1) A vulnerable woman who went to a trusted and respected hypnotherapist for help, and didn't get what she thought she would from the experience, and is now going public over what she believes is tantamount to psychological abuse ... in a thoughtful well planned out way.

or

(2) A man who has been illegally practicing hypnotherapy, is not a medical professional, but nevertheless implanted notions of Multiple Personality Disorder in his research subject, and believes that some instant messages he was witness to are from ... alien hybrid extraterrestrials. Oh and is now saying that this research subject has borderline personality disorder even though he is not qualified to do so (he says he has discussed this with amorphous/mysterious psychiatrists and the like) in an unreasonable and non-compassionate manner.

For the life of me, I cannot see any way I can support Dr Jacobs in this. To me he has no redeeming factors ... and believe me, I've really tried to see some good in this whole thing. Maybe he did good work at the beginning (although, he has stated in another interview that he believes that the alien abduction thing truly started in, I believe, 1987 ... a year after he took up hypnotism ... ) but I think that was a very long time ago now ... and frankly doesn't count any more in my mind.

ps Fastwalker: you've put things as eloquently as I have at least ... so don't put yourself down [I believe its better and shows higher intellect when you DON'T use long words ]

 

[ArizonaWill]

Couldn't agree more Sir Fastwalker . To me though all this can come down to some simple facts:

Who would you believe?

(1) A vulnerable woman who went to a trusted and respected hypnotherapist for help, and didn't get what she thought she would from the experience, and is now going public over what she believes is tantamount to psychological abuse ... in a thoughtful well planned out way.

or

(2) A man who has been illegally practicing hypnotherapy, is not a medical professional, but nevertheless implanted notions of Multiple Personality Disorder in his research subject, and believes that some instant messages he was witness to are from ... alien hybrid extraterrestrials. Oh and is now saying that this research subject has borderline personality disorder even though he is not qualified to do so (he says he has discussed this with amorphous/mysterious psychiatrists and the like) in an unreasonable and non-compassionate manner.

For the life of me, I cannot see any way I can support Dr Jacobs in this. To me he has no redeeming factors ... and believe me, I've really tried to see some good in this whole thing. Maybe he did good work at the beginning (although, he has stated in another interview that he believes that the alien abduction thing truly started in, I believe, 1987 ... a year after he took up hypnotism ... ) but I think that was a very long time ago now ... and frankly doesn't count any more in my mind.

ps Fastwalker: you've put things as eloquently as I have at least ... so don't put yourself down [I believe its better and shows higher intellect when you DON'T use long words ]

Thank you. Actually, we are seeing this same dynamic playing out in the mainstream. I do not want to get into a debate about religion, but in the wider society we are seeing the claims of literally hundreds (if not thousands) of boys from across the US and now Europe of sexual abuse by Catholic priests. There is evidence that the church covered this up and that it goes to the very pinacle of the church.

Yet we have the same 2 camps:

1. Those who are listening to the true victims and objectively evaluating their claims.
2. Those who march lockstep with the church, who claim that all such accusations are "idle gossip". Since the church is too polite to call thousands of boys "batshit insane" they instead demean the entire topic. There are mouthpieces here in the US who are invited to all the typical cable news channels to defend the church and debase the victims. I can envision a forum devoted to this controversy, with someone hypthetically named Archibald saying "The Pope and I are very close personal friends, and I am on a first name basis with all the Bishops of the Church. I've broken bread and wind with them all on occasion, and see nothing suspect in their hands-on instructions to the altar boys under their care. They assure me that this is pure idle gossip and that the mainstream media is simply stalking the church to defame its sterling reputation! The boys who are making these accusations are obviously bi-polar, borderline multiple personality oriented gender confused protestants!"

I am sure my little analogy isn't too hard for anyone to understand.

The real issue is the use of hypnosis, a tool that psychiatry says is NOT A VALID TOOL FOR MEMORY RESTORAL, being used by amateurs, and the damage to real human lives. As in the church pedophile network analogy, there are those who inexplicably side with the church. God help them to find their souls.

Note: Remember - this is only an analogy for how people seem to approach such scandals. The only "hands-on" scandal I am aware of in the UFO community was with Richard Boylan, the hottub psychologist who invited his prettiest female "research patient" to do some nude hot tub therapy with him. He lost his California license to practice over that one, even though I am sure there are those who would consider it "idle gossip".

 

[trainedobserver]

To me the issue here aren't the personal/professional problems between Jacobs and Woods. I think those are in the end highly legal questions. While I think you could argue the real issue here is what are the best practices for alien abduction research. the issue to me is whether Dr. Jacobs thinks alien hybrids are in direct communication with him or not and why. I was astounded that this wasn't explored in the episode. To me the implications of Jacob's thinking he is personal contact are as startling as anything else about this business.

 

[ArizonaWill]

To me the issue here isn't the problems between Jacobs and Woods. I think they are in the end highly legal questions. I don't even think the issue here is what are the best practices for alien abduction research.

The issue to me is whether Dr. Jacobs thinks he is in direct communication with alien hybrids or not and why.

Emma Woods is simply representative of a larger issue: the use of regression hypnosis to create a colorful narrative that is later sold in bookstores by abduction researchers. Even if Emma Woods was a troll (in internet speak), the issue remains. Psychiatry has stated without any if, buts, or maybe's that hypnosis should NOT be used in this way because the results are not valid. Yet the tiny arrogant ufology community (like all small cults) just goes its merry way using this tool to create a myth over the last 25 years.

I respect your focus on whether Jacobs really believes in hybrids. Unless he lied in his book THE THREAT then he certainly does believe in them. Does he really believe they are communicating with him? I'm not sure he is gullible enough to ever confess that! Even in the ranks of the solid gold Ufology elite, there might be little tolerance for that confession outside Exopolitics!

That is not my issue.

I don't care if he believes in hybrids, or believes in beautiful blonde space babes from an orbiting mothership called the LOVE BOAT, or if he thinks the cashier at the local supermarket is a hybrid sending him coded messages in his grocery receipt! He can have his crazy beliefs and have a nice little clubhouse for those who share those beliefs. I draw the line at using a mind altering tool to advance this craziness, strip mining peoples' consciousness in the process so that he can write another lurid book! Don't you see the larger immorality to all this?

What I learned from all this is that Jacobs sees anyone who comes to him as fodder for his next book, as a research assistant in that respect. However, I suspect that many of the people who come to him are vulnerable, scared, and assume he is there to HELP THEM! That is what is sad about this and can cause the blood to start boiling, when you realize all this hocus pokus is being done to help firm-up the dogma that Budd and David pretty much dreampt up!

---------- Post added at 09:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:44 PM ----------

To me the issue here aren't the personal/professional problems between Jacobs and Woods. I think those are in the end highly legal questions. While I think you could argue the real issue here is what are the best practices for alien abduction research. the issue to me is whether Dr. Jacobs thinks alien hybrids are in direct communication with him or not and why. I was astounded that this wasn't explored in the episode. To me the implications of Jacob's thinking he is personal contact are as startling as anything else about this business.

With all due respect to Gene, I consider the Paracast interview with him and Budd Hopkins to have effectively been a "Larry King" interview (i.e., no hard questions). I really think that if you truly care about this subject, you cannot rely on 1 podcast provider alone. You need to include the podcast by The Clueless One and Jeff Ritzman, for example. Yes, I have had a personal run-in with Jeremy and he is very abrasive and downright rude, but nonetheless he and Jeff do knock a few out of the park! No one can afford to just pick a particular podcast and "be true to your school" (Beach Boys, 1963). You need to really "get around, get around, I get around" (Beach Boys, 1964).

A Podcast is not a clubhouse. It is a source for information. Yet no one podcast provider can be the total truth (especially when one such provider says he never reads other ufo boards or listens to other podcasts - yikes! What a vacuum such a person lives in).

Surfs up! (that means I gotta go).

 

[Gene Steinberg]

You listened to a different interview than we participated in. The one we participated in involved Hopkins and Jacobs effectively defeating their own case with their responses.