• 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!

Brad Steiger


Forums New posts
DaveM

DaveM

Paranormal Adept
If only more guests were like Brad Steiger. Brad has so many tales to tell and he has giving much thought to the paranormal field over the years. He always had an intelligent answer to any question posed to him. I also like that he doesn't come across as many of the guests. Many of them won't answer questions... buy the book if you want to know more. Thanks for having him on again.
 
Agree. Love Brad. But I'm finding Gene's nonstop bad/corny/grasping for Hollywood to notice him references to tv shows and movies beyond grating. It's your show, so do what you want. But two of my friends stopped listening because the "older than the Temple on the Mount" and non-stop references to money (e.g., the Twitter IPO). A well run show moves quickly and concisely, which is why I still think that George Knapp is head and shoulders above anyone in the field. Chris, you're better, but your questions can be verbose and overly complicated. Get to the point. Get out. This is an area where my friends and I really miss David. Okay. Still like the show, but finding myself drifting away, especially since the guests seem to be on the same radio/podcast circuit. That said, thanks for providing a free show. It's a huge amount of work, and I respect that.
 
rBrad has a VERY interesting take on the abduction phenomenon that's for sure. Likening it to an upgrade in one's spiritual evolution, albeit a non-consensual upgrade ? Given that most people report that such occurrences...admittedly questionable....are usually painful and emotionally traumatic it would seem to me there are more benign ways of going about it. At the very least maybe the abductors should consider anesthesia or taking us offline before the probing and implanting commence :)

Understanding that the above scenario could fall under the old canard of your experience is dependent of what you are expecting...which I'm open to....I'd be interested in knowing if the people who were abducted came away from their "experience" spiritually improved or emotionally scarred and if there is an intelligence behind this force, what good does it do us if it turns out to be the latter ?

If any alien greys are reading this I plan to take up meditation very soon, so you needn't bother with me.

A lot of people are probably walking around with sore feet. :mad:
 
Last edited:
zorthron said:
Agree. Love Brad. But I'm finding Gene's nonstop bad/corny/grasping for Hollywood to notice him references to tv shows and movies beyond grating. It's your show, so do what you want. But two of my friends stopped listening because the "older than the Temple on the Mount" and non-stop references to money (e.g., the Twitter IPO). A well run show moves quickly and concisely, which is why I still think that George Knapp is head and shoulders above anyone in the field. Chris, you're better, but your questions can be verbose and overly complicated. Get to the point. Get out. This is an area where my friends and I really miss David. Okay. Still like the show, but finding myself drifting away, especially since the guests seem to be on the same radio/podcast circuit. That said, thanks for providing a free show. It's a huge amount of work, and I respect that.
Click to expand...

Are you and I listening to the same show(s)? If so, that was the worst overall review of a program I have ever read.
"Thanks for the free show....huge amt of work" That about sums it up, and could have started and ended there, as far as your post is concerned.
 
Last edited:
Stagger Lee said:
Are you and I listening to the same show(s)? If so, that was the worst overall review of a program I have ever read. If anyone is trying to get the attention of Hollywood, it would be "Angry Man" D. Biedney (since you're comparing) We all know there are ways to get "Hollywood's attention" -(maybe Gene putting out a sex video) I don't see the hosts of the Paracast going to any of those extreams.
"Thanks for the free show....huge amt of work" That about sums it up, and could have started and ended there, as far as your post is concerned.
Click to expand...

Besides that, the vast majority of Chris's questions are OUR's. Chris is just reading them as Is. it's more precise to suggest that it's us listeners who are verbose and overly complicated.
 
Wade Ridsdale said:
Besides that, the vast majority of Chris's questions are OUR's. Chris is just reading them as Is. it's more precise to suggest that it's us listeners who are verbose and overly complicated.
Click to expand...
Of course knowing that requires actually listening to the show. Methinks the poster in question merely had an agenda, or listened to another show but didn't realize it. :)
 
I was pretty underwhelmed by Brad's appearance. He sounded bored and talked in such generalities that if I wasn't already familiar with many paranormal concepts I wouldn't have had any idea what he was going on about. Perhaps he didn't want to divulge any examples he had in his book but for the most part what I heard was genenchris offering possibilities and brad followed up with vaguely defined ...not specific...examples or theories. Even after gene had WISELY asked him to cough up one he just vaguely touched on the french court case...which I'm familiar with....and a more contemporary case....I would have liked to have looked into that one but he sat on that one as well. I wouldn't buy his book based on what he had to offer, or maybe it's better to say DIDN'T have to offer, because of his reluctance to open up. Maybe it was because all the stories were so long that they can't be told in 5 minutes or so and thus are buried in his new book.

I thought he was going to cut loose a little after a break when you guys started talking about doorways being dimensional or time travel vessels. One of the questions I would have asked him (had I noticed in time) was if he knew about any particular case from the past where people had recorded any visions of ghosts or spectres and their specific dress...not just "I saw a queer vision to-dayeth"...because I once had a thought that maybe any visions of ghosts that people reported in the past MAY have been our contemporary selves and they were seeing the opposite of what we are seeing because of a time rift. But he probably would of blew past that one if such an example existed.

His excuse of his reluctance to be specific even within his book also comes off as trite to me (although probably genuine) because of secretiveness (?) I was of the thought that another aspect of not giving specific names or locations was that it's validity could not be verified nor looked at independently. Sorry brad I'm passing on this effort. If you appear on c2c and give all kinds of specific examples I'm going to be pissed. :)

Brad does do a pretty decent Paracast stinger(?) Though
 
Last edited:
Gene Steinberg said:
Grasping for Hollywood to notice me? Twitter? You mean all two sentences about it? You and I are in a different reality.
Click to expand...

Oh Gene you are busted! Everyone knows that you are trying to parlay the Paracast into one of those SciFi shows with night vision goggles pointing up your nose as you visit various scary places. We see right through you! I think I heard a ghost child knocking!
 
I understand about pets. I had a dog and I cried when he got old and died and I buried him, but let's face it folks, pet's aren't "little people", they're animals, and when you take an animal home from the humane society or pet store ( whatever ), you're not rescuing a "little person", you're taking on the responsibility of maintaining the life of an animal, and I find it disturbing that so many people invest so much time and money in animals for whatever personal reasons they have rather than spending those same resources helping real people. There are real children out there dying slow horrible deaths from leprosy while pet people drone on and on about how cute and cuddly and smart little Fifi ( or WTF ) their stupid pet is.

After hurricane Sandy there were thousands of people displaced and left homeless, yet there were pet people who spent millions on a huge animal shelter complete with "animal psychologists" while real people were huddling outside under blankets begging for food :confused: . There's just something wrong with that ( even though I understand the attachment people get to their pets ). Anyway, after listening to the pet people droning on for who knows how long, I just started fast forwarding, and the show never captured my attention for long anyplace else. Maybe I'll revisit it some other time. In the meantime Brad Steiger remains one of my all time favorite authors of books on the unexplained.

A short but engaging collection of interesting accounts:

AlienMeetings.jpg

 
Last edited:
ufology said:
I understand about pets. I had a dog and I cried when he got old and died and I buried him, but let's face it folks, pet's aren't "little people", they're animals, and when you take an animal home from the humane society or pet store ( whatever ), you're not rescuing a "little person", you're taking on the responsibility to maintain the life of an animal, and I find it disturbing that so many people invest so much time and money in animals for whatever personal reasons they have rather than spending those same resources helping real people. There are real children out there dying slow horrible deaths from leprosy while pet people drone on and on about how cute and cuddly and smart little Fifi ( or WTF ) their stupid pet is.

After hurricane Sandy there were thousands of people displaced and left homeless, yet there were pet people who spent millions on a huge animal shelter complete with "animal psychologists" while real people were huddling outside under blankets begging for food :confused: . There's just something wrong with that ( even though I understand the attachment people get to their pets ). Anyway, after listening to the pet people droning on for who knows how long, I just started fast forwarding, and the show never captured my attention for long anyplace else. Maybe I'll revisit it some other time. In the meantime Brad Steiger remains one of my all time favorite authors of books on the unexplained.

A short but engaging collection of interesting accounts:

AlienMeetings.jpg
Click to expand...
All right, I think that caring about animals doesn't have to mean you don't care about people and particularly people who are victims of a disaster of some sort.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
All right, I think that caring about animals doesn't have to mean you don't care about people and particularly people who are victims of a disaster of some sort.
Click to expand...

It's not about whether or not we care. It's about triage. It's a shame that Fido might be out on the street instead of a real person, and it's a shame Mew Mew might not find an owner instead of saving a real child, but it's a simple fact that every resource spent on people's pets could go to some better humanitarian cause. But fine. We're comfy here and we have the right to spend our resources the way we see fit, even if it is to have some fuzzy little animal on a leash instead of curing an orphaned child of leprosy.

And while I'm at it, I'll readily admit I'm no self-sacrificing saint. I live in a house and drive a car and have a TV and a PC and most of the western comforts of home, and when I do spend on charity, 99% of the time it's via lottery tickets, so there's an element of self-interest there as well. But at the same time that money does go to charity on a regular basis, and I don't purposefully put another mouth to feed into the picture that isn't a human being, because that's what it comes down to. Why would I purposefully choose to provide food, shelter and medical care for Cuddles the cat instead of a real person?
 
ufology said:
Why would I purposefully choose to provide food, shelter and medical care for Cuddles the cat instead of a real person?
Click to expand...
Why can't you do both? The best animal companion I have ever had is the blind-at-birth kitty to the left. She has been an endless source of learning and love for me over the past 7 years. I would choose her needs over those of many humans I have encountered over the years.
 
Well I'm about to help push this thread off topic again but @gene & @randall you both make good points but I don't think it's really a either/or case. One could argue that being there are still people living in abject poverty in our inner cities and indigenous lands that are perpetually wanting should we bother with animals or disaster victims either foreign or domestic ? Obviously I don't feel that way, but I don't think there is a right or wrong here. Every cause needs a champion, we just live in a world with too much cause and too little champions.
 
Back
Top