• 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!

Ben Radford Will Be Next Week's Guest... Questions Space Fanz?


Christopher O'Brien

Back in the Saddle Aginn
Staff member
We are happy to announce the return of everyone's favorite "good natured" skeptic, Ben Radford. During his last visit to the Paracast (April 17, 2011 — Benjamin Radford) We talked about his excellent book Tracking the Chupacabra. This time around we'll be discussing his new book Mysterious New Mexico. We all know that NM is the "Land of Enchantment," but what does Ben really think? Inquiring minds, like yours, will find out! Please post YOUR QUESTIONS here...

The recording session is set for Tuesday, September 2.
 
There seems to be certain factions on both sides of the ufology issue who suggest that building bridges between skeptics and ufologists is a bit of a pipe dream. Do you feel that the gap between ufology and skepticism is so great that the two will remain forever mutually exclusive? Or do you think there is there a way to build those bridges, and if so how might we start?

NOTE: In the spirit of optimism, I invite you to discuss this on the Paracast forum after the show ( or even beforehand to some extent if you happen to be checking the question bank ).
 
Last edited:
4) In all the episodes of Monster Talk I've heard, the only monster that's come closest to possibly existing is the hairy hominid of the northwest, Sasquatch. What are your thoughts on the history of Bigfoot and his continued presence in witness testimony & plaster casts?

3) In all your own personal research has there ever been a paranormal mystery that you could not use science to dismiss or completely explain?

2) In the history of Ufological studies there have been many serious scientists who have pursued this conundrum. What are your thoughts about the passionate convictions of people like James E. McDonald or Jaques Vallée who were convinced that something extraordinary, possibly even otherworldly, has been cruising around in our atmosphere?

1) Do you think that skepticism can become too rabid as seen in the absolute relish it seems to take in mocking everyone who takes the UFO phenomenon seiously, including those who wish to apply science to the problem i.e. Klass' persistent hounding and harassing of McDonald? Such activities appear to continue to this day in the sarcastic tone the Skeptical Inquirer applies to all things UFO in nature. Is this a healthy approac and is it consistent with Truzzi's foundational principles and his Zetetic approach to unique phenomenon?
 
Last edited:
tbh, I'm not the least bit familiar with Ben but in a Google search a high ranking return wasn't very complementary and indicated he may be dogged by other issues. I am not going to go near that, but does the " " around "good natured" indicate sarcasm?
 
…does the " " around "good natured" indicate sarcasm?
No, Ben comes across as a really nice guy. More than a few skeptics seem to have permanent scowls, Ben has a genuine smile, is very easy going and try's not to be aggressively contentious. As to the "other issues" a person is innocent until found guilty and we have agreed not to bring this topic up until it has been resolved. The other issue concerning accusations of research/study bias will be addressed.
 
No, Ben comes across as a really nice guy. More than a few skeptics seem to have permanent scowls, Ben has a genuine smile, is very easy going and try's not to be aggressively contentious. As to the "other issues" a person is innocent until found guilty and we have agreed not to bring this topic up until it has been resolved. The other issue concerning accusations of research/study bias will be addressed.
I'm a loyal listener to both the Paracast and Monster Talk, so this show should be great. I'm looking forward to it.
 
Mr. Radford is intelligent and the reason I just joined this forum today. I do recommend his book, Stalking the Chupacabra, it is an excellent thought provoking read. As far as Mr. Radford being "good natured" I think this is indicative of his personality and has nothing to do with his skeptical beliefs. Many blind followers and believers of the likes of Hoagland are far worse on the ears than a well educated man like Mr. Radford. Being skeptical and/or pragmatic does not make a person evil, mean, stupid or weak and the implication thereof is middle school.

Just one simple question for Mr. Bradford:

What unexplained thing, event or human circumstance confounds you?

Thanks!

Edit: Wrong word. Can't spell.

Super bonus edit: "Tracking the Chupacabra" obviously I am 300 pages into the excellent "Stalking the Herd."
 
Last edited:
Mr. Radford is intelligent and the reason I just joined this forum today. I do recommend his book, Stalking the Chupacabra, it is an excellent thought provoking read. As far as Mr. Radford being "good natured" I think this is indicative of his personality and has nothing to do with his skeptical beliefs. Many blind followers and believers of the likes of Hoagland are far worse on the ears than a well educated man like Mr. Radford. Being skeptical and/or pragmatic does not make a person evil, mean, stupid or weak and the implication thereof is middle school.

Just one simple question for Mr. Bradford:

What unexplained thing, event or human circumstance confounds you?

Thanks!

Edit: Wrong word. Can't spell.

Super bonus edit: "Tracking the Chupacabra" obviously I am 300 pages into the excellent "Stalking the Herd."
lousy name
 
Mr. Radford is intelligent and the reason I just joined this forum today. I do recommend his book, Stalking the Chupacabra, it is an excellent thought provoking read. As far as Mr. Radford being "good natured" I think this is indicative of his personality and has nothing to do with his skeptical beliefs. Many blind followers and believers of the likes of Hoagland are far worse on the ears than a well educated man like Mr. Radford. Being skeptical and/or pragmatic does not make a person evil, mean, stupid or weak and the implication thereof is middle school.

Just one simple question for Mr. Bradford:

What unexplained thing, event or human circumstance confounds you?

Thanks!

Edit: Wrong word. Can't spell.

Super bonus edit: "Tracking the Chupacabra" obviously I am 300 pages into the excellent "Stalking the Herd."
It's Radford.
 
is there any evidence for the existence of Bigfoot?
with most chupas being found to be dogs with mange can we write off the chupa as being a real creature?
 
While on crypto topic: His thoughts on the topic of Skinwalker Ranch and the creatures/entities known to be residing there, could a chupa be residing there?
 
On top of that, what exactly are chupacabras other than goat suckers?, some are pictured as mangy dogs and some are reptilian like creatures, is a chupa a classification or exactly a specific thing now? Is there any historical artifacts in other countries describing or detailing a chupa
 
Back
Top