BEWARE! Bill Knell is back!

[Rocketsauce]

Strangely, I think you could argue that cheating people out of a dog is worse than so many other crimes.

Imagine, you spend months researching what type of dog you want, you contact a dude who pretends he's a middleman with breeders, you spend weeks leading up to this going to Petsmart, reading about how to take care of the dog, telling your friends and co-workers you are getting a dog and setting up your home for the arrival of a dog and then you wait for months and no dog comes. You keep complaining and hearing excuses. Finally a dog comes and it's not even the dog you asked for. The guy claims he doesn't have your money and there is no where to return the dog you didn't want.............. That's when I would call in the A Team.

What a low life piece of sh*t. It's no surprise he became a figure in the gullible world of UFOs

The cost/reward of selling bootlegged UFO dvd's? That just seems crazy. The dog scam though, I bet he made some real money, people pay a lot of money for purebred dogs.

 

[Gareth]

I have to say, I'm very proud of the fact that The Paracast hung this guy out to dry, with Frank's help, especially because it came on the heels of a few other media appearances that Knell had done last year, where NOT ONE of the other shows took the time to even type his name in Google.


dB

Thats what really gets me. Youd think, this being the UFO 'field' and all, that paranormal radio shows would be in the habit of doing due diligence on their guests.

From what I know of so far, the only 2 shows on the subject that really have enduring credibility are the Paracast and Greg Bishops Radio Misterioso. Eerie Radio are ok, but they seem more about paranormal entertainment with a focus on 'comedic' banter between the group. They get good guests and sometimes dodgy guests but rarely do I hear a tough question asked.

 

[Schuyler]

It seems like most of the shows try to emulate Click and Clack, the tappet brothers. The Yuck-it-up stuff is really annoying. Not that a few jokes aren't appropriate, it's just that the three stooges routine gets old quickly (including the newest Podcast, if you know what I mean.) I appreciate Gene and David playing is straight. It sounds a lot more professional.

 

[Gareth]

I know EXACTLY what you mean. And it drives me crazy. It feels so contrived.

 

[paraschtick]

I know EXACTLY what you mean. And it drives me crazy. It feels so contrived.

I have the same problem too. I will intentionally avoid any UFO/Paranormal program that includes comedy of any sort. I'll not even listen to the new Vaeni and Ritzmann Paratopia thing now after hearing the first episode.

I know most of it is interview (and the size of the file is enormous, as are some other podcasts ... I'm NOT going to download an hour or two interview that weighs in at over 100Mb ) but ... the whole field is hampered by the impression of people outside the field seeing it as silly, nonsense or crackpottery ... and having comedy set-pieces or an entertainment feel, I think detracts from what is a deeply serious and important subject.

[Oh did anyone hear Tim Binnall state on his programme that BOAA is a purely entertainment programme??? Ye gods ...]

 

[Schuyler]

I have the same problem too. I will intentionally avoid any UFO/Paranormal program that includes comedy of any sort. I'll not even listen to the new Vaeni and Ritzmann Paratopia thing now after hearing the first episode.

That's who I was alluding to up there. Since they post here I was trying to be a little sensitive, but I might as well be open about it. Maybe they can get some value from it. That first show was just awful. I listened to the whole thing because I kept thinking this has got to get better but it didn't. It reminded me of Seinfeld; a show about nothing, and an immature one at that. It had no content and it wasn't funny.

The other thing is, I dunno, but I feel kinda crappy about this. If you'll allow me to use my Pub analogy again, it's like you owned a bar with a theme and you had a couple of really good customers who provided value, were well-respected by oher customers, and contributed to the cause, and you considered them friends, then suddenly they say, "Well, I like this so much that I'm going to open up a bar across the street with exactly the same theme and the same set-up and compete for the same folks!" Well, free enterprise and all. You can't tell people what to do and you have to respect that, but it leaves kind of a bad taste in my mouth. I would think Gene and Dave might feel some sense of betrayal. I don't think they would EVER say that in public. But I can because I have no official ties other than being an obnoxious guest.

When ATS started up their podcasts I didn't really care because you just know they're in it for themselves. I used to spend a lot of time and energy there, but I left on my own because I was really putting a lot more into it than I was getting out of it. Plus I hated their tin-pot fascist moderation treating everyone like shit. They're one of those click and clack teams and as far as I'm concerned, they have very little credibility. But that's like a huge sports bar across town. Do they compete? Well, yeah, kinda, but they are so damned loud and noisy that who wants to go there? Lots of people I'd rather not associate with, basically. I don't miss it, and I absolutely detest white on black screens. (It's an eyesight issue.)

So that's my take on it.

 

[Stillborn]

Thats what really gets me. Youd think, this being the UFO 'field' and all, that paranormal radio shows would be in the habit of doing due diligence on their guests.

From what I know of so far, the only 2 shows on the subject that really have enduring credibility are the Paracast and Greg Bishops Radio Misterioso. Eerie Radio are ok, but they seem more about paranormal entertainment with a focus on 'comedic' banter between the group. They get good guests and sometimes dodgy guests but rarely do I hear a tough question asked.

Darkness On the Edge of Town hosts are open minded skeptics. They do a good job of questioning. At least the shows that I've listened to of theirs.

 

[Gareth]

You guys should really give Jeff and Jeremys thing another chance. I dont much care for the intro and outro 'paratopia narrative' but the meat of the podcast is good stuff. They have been getting really good guests and generally interview them for an hour then talk about the topic for an hour.

The banter stuff is just at the front and back of the podcast.

Schuyler I thought you were talking about Eerie?

edit... also I dont really think they have the same focus as the Paracast. They seem to be approaching the show from the point of view of two 'experiencers' trying to figure what happened to them, whereas the Paracast will interview anyone of interest to the paranormal. Just my take on it anyway, hopefully Jeremy will pop in and give his 2 cents. (would be curious to hear if Gene/David actually were a little irked by it too. Id honestly be pretty surprised if they were).

 

[Tommy Allison]

Wow. Looked into Bill Knell.

Jesus Christ... What a piece of work that guy is.

I still have to say though, there are people just like Bill in this business all over the place who are just as guilty of being full of shit.

I'm looking forward to the day when all the frauds get the boot from this field.

 

[Stillborn]

Wow. Looked into Bill Knell.

Jesus Christ... What a piece of work that guy is.

I still have to say though, there are people just like Bill in this business all over the place who are just as guilty of being full of shit.

I'm looking forward to the day when all the frauds get the boot from this field.

Did you miss the Paracast show he was on?

That day will never come unfortunately. Boot one out the door another enters

 

[Stillborn]

You guys should really give Jeff and Jeremys thing another chance. I dont much care for the intro and outro 'paratopia narrative' but the meat of the podcast is good stuff. They have been getting really good guests and generally interview them for an hour then talk about the topic for an hour.

The banter stuff is just at the front and back of the podcast.

Schuyler I thought you were talking about Eerie?

edit... also I dont really think they have the same focus as the Paracast. They seem to be approaching the show from the point of view of two 'experiencers' trying to figure what happened to them, whereas the Paracast will interview anyone of interest to the paranormal. Just my take on it anyway, hopefully Jeremy will pop in and give his 2 cents. (would be curious to hear if Gene/David actually were a little irked by it too. Id honestly be pretty surprised if they were).

I just started checking it out the other day. The intros are way too long imo. Other than that, it's fine. And free, so no complaints here other than the intro. I joined their forum too. They seem not as uptight as certain places.

 

[Rocketsauce]

That's who I was alluding to up there. Since they post here I was trying to be a little sensitive, but I might as well be open about it. Maybe they can get some value from it. That first show was just awful. I listened to the whole thing because I kept thinking this has got to get better but it didn't. It reminded me of Seinfeld; a show about nothing, and an immature one at that. It had no content and it wasn't funny.

So that's my take on it.

I dig Paratopia, but can see how it's not for everyone, particularly those that want a more serious tone to a show on this topic. But, personally, I think the goofy banter on Paratopia can be pretty funny and the interviews are good. I see them as 2 guys who are wondering what the fuck happened to them and instead of being all depressed, angry and serious, they use the humor as a means of coping and also to make light of a subject area that is just filled with totally ridiculous people. I must admit, the more I've listened I've grown to enjoy hearing Jeff's totally dry wit in contrast to jeremy being over the top.

The people in this field are so ridiculous, I just don't see how humor can be avoided sometimes. I think the show also makes fun of itself, because even though 'new age' has a very negative connotation for many of us, at some level, the more you get into this topic, I think there are certain 'new age' principles that many of us end up embracing, even if we think that term and the people who it stands for are bunk.

In this space, as far as I can tell, there is little to no money to be made from a podcast. I play in a local band and I love it when a new great local band comes on the scene that is similar to my band. It's not like they are 'stealing our fans' if anything, it helps build up a community and generates more fans for everyone. Whereas if you owned a local bar and a similar bar opened down the street, you could actually lose out on significant revenue. If Paratopia all of a sudden starts running ads from E-foods direct (by the way, they are advising everyone to sell all their toys and invest in food, great advice! ) and the paracast loses that revenue then i think that analogy holds up better. If anything, a show like Coast to Coast which does make money should be weary of shows like the paracast and paratopia that help people realize how ridiculous C2C is and are actualy free to download! I'm an example of this, I used to pay to listen to C2C online and now I don't since I've found enough other podcosts that are free which I find more useful.

I think Jeff and Jeremy have had some great guests on and I also think those dudes because they are serious experiencers may have the most accurate opinions of anyone I've heard on this stuff. Their emphasis on the high strange and subjective nature of this stuff seems like it's on the right track to me. You would probably like the episode where they interviewed the Physics expert on solar sails, that was really cool and more scientific than I can remember the paracast getting anytime recently.

The tone of the paracast and paratopia are certainly different. Paracast sometimes has kind an angry frustrated and dare I say it, "righteous" tone, which I think fits the show well as they try to weed out all the crap in this field while paratopia is less angry and more 2 guys trying to figure out what happened to them without becoming too depressed or angry or losing their minds. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Gareth]

The thing is they dont really do any goofy stuff aside from the beginning and end. The main part of the podcast (interview + post interview talk) seems deadly serious to me.

 

[Rocketsauce]

The thing is they dont really do any goofy stuff aside from the beginning and end. The main part of the podcast (interview + post interview talk) seems deadly serious to me.

Yeah, the bulk of the interviews are straight serious and I think they ask good questions. The goofy part seems to have decreased with each new episode and like you said are at the intro and outro.

 

[paraschtick]

Yeah, the bulk of the interviews are straight serious and I think they ask good questions. The goofy part seems to have decreased with each new episode and like you said are at the intro and outro.

I've been a bit too harsh on my comments on Paratopia ... but I do agree with what the last few posts have said. The goofy stuff at the beginning is not too long before the serious stuff takes over. However anyone coming to the podcast not knowing this may listen for a few minutes ... think "oh stuff it" ... and go back to listening to C2C.

That would be a shame as the interviews are pretty much top notch. I've only listened to a couple so far (the download size is a bit big for me) but they've been really fascinating as have most of Vaeni's interviews at the Culture of Contact website.

I'm halfway through the latest one. Not agreeing with anything the guest has been saying ... which is a first for me . But then again, does anyone really understand what this bloke is babbling on about. What he seems to be saying is sort of sub-Jung. Think I'll have to listen to it again methinks. And saying all UFOs are NOT nuts and bolts. Bloody nora ... do me a favour, guv.

 

[Ally]

Paraschtick,
It took me awhile to understand what he was about and what concepts he was trying to get through to the listeners. I agree there is a Jungian aspect about his definition (OOPS) of the trickster but I think he delves much deeper and into different territory.

I think I understand what he saying but I don't think I am able to write about it in a way the would be understood. I am not gifted in that area of communication and that can get frustrating here at times. I understand Jeff's expressed frustration with this as well. He expresses that but I think he actually does a very good job.

 

[Rocketsauce]

I only got a couple minutes, but yeah the last guest on Paratopia was just a bit abstract I think he was really focussing on the larger picture and those general factors that are common of all paranormal activity. I don't know Jung or any of his writings, so I probably missed a bunch of the undercurrent of what he was saying, but I did appreciate his macro perspective.

I think some of his 'insistences' were kind of for show, like his insistence that the 'why' is not important (I think that's what he said?) and also that a particular instance was sociological not psychology, but at his base, I like how he was identifying the common factors that link paranormal phenomena and how they relate to the larger population of people who interact with this. I do remember thinking the point he made at the beginning that it's a very unique paradox that movies like 'Independence Day' show how popular this issue is yet it's not mainstream at all in terms of academia, media, politics was not very unique to this phenomena. There are tons of pop culture and scientific ideas that are really popular in entertainment/culture that don't make the leap to mainstream credibility, so I think that point was pointless.

He was not my favorite guest, but I like how they are getting different perspectives and people outside this realm who have different legitimate expertise and backgrounds.

 

[paraschtick]

Paraschtick,
It took me awhile to understand what he was about and what concepts he was trying got get through to the listeners. I agree there is a Jungian aspect about his definition (OOPS) of the trickster but I think he delves much deeper and into different territory.

I think I understand what he saying but I don't think I am able to write about it in a way the would be understood. I am not gifted in that area of communication and that can get frustrating here at times. I understand Jeff's expressed frustration with this as well. He expresses that but I think he actually does a very good job.

Yep I think I'm going to have to listen to it again when I have some quiet time. I still think he is wrong in some aspects. Its more of a gut feeling ... a feeling I get literally in my stomach when something doesn't feel or sound right to me. I get this with music (especially with bands like ... umm ... Radiohead hehe ) and arty type things as well (yeah I don't have that communication thing either ... ).

So yeah, I think another careful listen is needed for this one. However I'm still pretty damn sure that at least some percentage of ufos are real nuts and bolts craft. I've read too much of the subject not to think this not to be true.

 

[paraschtick]

I only got a couple minutes, but yeah the last guest on Paratopia was just a bit abstract I think he was really focussing on the larger picture and those general factors that are common of all paranormal activity. I don't know Jung or any of his writings, so I probably missed a bunch of the undercurrent of what he was saying, but I did appreciate his macro perspective.
[\quote]

Don't worry, I think a lot of us found him to be rather abstract ... maybe too absract?? Anyway, I agree there are some very interesting sociological areas (is that the word??) surrounding the pararnormal in general. However, I don't believe that sociology is the answer to the entire field. Its far too complicated/complex for such a waffly "science" as sociology to give us all the answers.

 

[bobheck]

Sigh. No, not Knell again. Geez.