• 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!

February 13 Jari Mikkola

Forums New posts
Regarding Jarri's analysis of the 'Jerusalem UFO':
I asked him some detailed questions of his analysis. He has yet to really answer these questions.
It seems he had already made up his mind the 'Jerusalem' case 'had to be a hoax' before the facts were in.
I looked at his web site supposedly debunking this Jerusalem case. All I can say is bunk to his debunking. Flash, technical dazzle, and name dropping. That's all I got from this guy. To be honest I couldn't stand to listen to the entire show.
I'm heartened to know I wasn't the only one to feel this way.
 
softbeard said:
Regarding Jarri's analysis of the 'Jerusalem UFO':
I asked him some detailed questions of his analysis. He has yet to really answer these questions.
It seems he had already made up his mind the 'Jerusalem' case 'had to be a hoax' before the facts were in.
I looked at his web site supposedly debunking this Jerusalem case. All I can say is bunk to his debunking. Flash, technical dazzle, and name dropping. That's all I got from this guy. To be honest I couldn't stand to listen to the entire show.
I'm heartened to know I wasn't the only one to feel this way.
Click to expand...

I for one could care less about any analysis of the videos. The fact that they are all from anonymous sources says all that needs to be known. In this day and age of powerful personal computers anyone can put together a decent fake. Because of that the images are not that important. It's the credibility of the witnesses that is. These witnesses all remain nameless despite considerable interest. That spells FAKE in mile-high letters.
 
ok first of all, no problems here downloading the show but lately been experiencing minor problems listening to it... I am using 3 different radio apps (esp.tunein radio) and all of them are telling me that there are difficulties with the unknown length of the file. but apart from the error message and a considerably longer download time everything's fine here...

I enjoyed the show a lot. do I believe everything that Jari said? hell no... but to be honest I don't believe everything anybody's saying... but he made some interesting remarks to old topics I considered dead and gone and tbh it made me opening the dusted box from the corner of my mind and browse through the old files.

What I find surprising is that some members over here are writing this episode (and the guest) off as unconvincing at best since jari was making some claims they cannot share. We are in the paranormal realm, guys, there is no 'hard' evidence here and I am afraid there will never be. moon landing, crop circles, black budgets, aliens, ghosts, big foots are just speculations right now until there is definitive proof for or against it. it's up to you whether you believe or not... or maintain a sceptical or neutral position... but first of all we are here because we wanna talk about these subjects and we wanna contribute to the discussion... that's what jari did and now it's up to us to do the same... if anyone has hard evidence that ghosts, ufos, government denials or secret budgets don't exist pls feel free to share...

nevertheless I would love to hear jari back up some of his claims (if possible) and it would be great to see some of the photos he mentioned in the show...

bijan
 
Glad you succeeded. About all I can do is test the server and, sometimes, have the admin people at our host check performance to see if there are bottlenecks. So, if we get reports of problems from a specific city or neighborhood, there's at least something to diagnose with their "backbone" carriers. Well, sometimes. And it still doesn't guarantee a fix.
 
I think he does a good job of driving a stake in the Jerusalem UFO and I really enjoyed his discussion of the videos. I grabbed my head and stumbled about a bit after he said we only went to the moon twice though. You would have to believe that Edgar Mitchell is a horrendous liar or so brainwashed as to think he actually walked on the moon. I don't buy that at all. I'd have to see some very compelling evidence to believe otherwise. It blows me away that anyone thinks that crop circles are anything but "yard art." I'm convinced that some folks could be taken by the hand and shown the whole process from beginning to end and still believe crop circles are of non-human origin. Jari, if you want to know the truth about crop circles talk to real crop circle makers rather than researchers whose livelihood depends on the fact that people believe they are made by ETs.
 
Maybe this should be a different topic, but something has been bothering me for quite a bit as I listen to the show.

The subject of "religion" and E.T. seems to come up frequently if just in passing and references to the Vatican announcing that it's "OK for the faithful to believe in life outside of this planet" as if this is something sudden and unexpected. Just a couple of things on this:

First is that many people would be surprised to see how many priests (and other Religious) are huge Science Fiction fans. Not to mention C.S. Lewis' exploration into this field with his Space trilogy. After all, a limitless God would not have a limited creation.

Second is that the Vatican has had an observatory since 1582, so interest in God's vast creation is nothing new.

Anyway, sorry to go a bit off topic, but I wasn't sure if this little bit justified an entire new post.
 
trainedobserver said:
I think he does a good job of driving a stake in the Jerusalem UFO and I really enjoyed his discussion of the videos. I grabbed my head and stumbled about a bit after he said we only went to the moon twice though. You would have to believe that Edgar Mitchell is a horrendous liar or so brainwashed as to think he actually walked on the moon. I don't buy that at all. I'd have to see some very compelling evidence to believe otherwise. It blows me away that anyone thinks that crop circles are anything but "yard art." I'm convinced that some folks could be taken by the hand and shown the whole process from beginning to end and still believe crop circles are of non-human origin. Jari, if you want to know the truth about crop circles talk to real crop circle makers rather than researchers whose livelihood depends on the fact that people believe they are made by ETs.
Click to expand...

I think we should all realize that we don't expect guests on The Paracast to agree with our points of view 100%. If that were the case, we'd have no guests. There is no litmus test of that sort, nor can there be. I agreed with some of what Jari said, and I'm not so impressed with his viewpoints about the moon landings, or Stan Romanek for that matter. But let's not use that as ammunition to dispose of everything else he talked about, nor of the evidence he presented from his own personal investigations.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
I think we should all realize that we don't expect guests on The Paracast to agree with our points of view 100%.
Click to expand...

Well of course not Gene and it would unreasonable to expect such a thing. It would be a pretty boring show if that were the case. I still reserve the right to grab my head and stumble about the office on occasion however.

Gene Steinberg said:
But let's not use that as ammunition to dispose of everything else he talked about, nor of the evidence he presented from his own personal investigations.
Click to expand...

Well that wasn't what I was suggesting at all Gene. Far from it.
 
That comment was meant for everyone, not just you. We need to be aware that some people who believe things you and I find totally incredible. Obviously, the really crazy folk and outright fakers aren't allowed here. If we find them, we'll expose them. But beyond those extremes, there are loads of pro and con opinions that will be aired, and some will infuriate our listeners. But that's how it goes.
 
Well I for one would just absolutely love to hear a pro and con moon hoax show with Jari and someone arguing the other side. I'd also love to hear a show where you have pro and con crop circle evidence reviewed with real crop circle makers.
 
lancemoody said:
There is no pro and con on the moon hoax idea. There are abject ridiculous nuts and everybody else.
Click to expand...

Well, I agree in principle. It sounds like Jari has a slightly different take on what I've heard before though. Having him come back for at least half a show and have some back and forth with someone about it could be (mock amazement) entertaining.
 
Wickerman1972 said:
I for one could care less about any analysis of the videos. The fact that they are all from anonymous sources says all that needs to be known. In this day and age of powerful personal computers anyone can put together a decent fake. Because of that the images are not that important. It's the credibility of the witnesses that is. These witnesses all remain nameless despite considerable interest. That spells FAKE in mile-high letters.
Click to expand...

Uh, Wickerman1972, where are you getting your info from? The 'sources' are not anonymous and nameless. Names are named in the interview.

The fact that you could care less about any analysis of the videos does not show anything except maybe that you could care less.
Whether it's a hoax or not, I think, can still be debated, but if it is a hoax, it's a real doozie. I still don't see how you can get this many elements together into a hoax. I think there's a reason these videos went viral. It's that they're extremely believable.

---------- Post added at 02:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:27 PM ----------

Men Around Screen said:
I hate to see people give in to taboos and reject entirely other people's thoughts based on their differences from the "accepted" line of thought which is deemed the only truth.
Click to expand...
These are not the reasons some people are very dubious of Mr. Mikkola's claims. It's when you look at the type of logic and evidence he uses that problems arise.
 
softbeard said:
Uh, Wickerman1972, where are you getting your info from? The 'sources' are not anonymous and nameless. Names are named in the interview.

The fact that you could care less about any analysis of the videos does not show anything except maybe that you could care less.
Whether it's a hoax or not, I think, can still be debated, but if it is a hoax, it's a real doozie. I still don't see how you can get this many elements together into a hoax. I think there's a reason these videos went viral. It's that they're extremely believable.

---------- Post added at 02:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:27 PM ----------
These are not the reasons some people are very dubious of Mr. Mikkola's claims. It's when you look at the type of logic and evidence he uses that problems arise.
Click to expand...

There's something wrong with your link. Isn't that from Cohen? I don't believe anything that guy says. Is anyone else saying the filmmakers have been identified?
 
Wickerman1972 said:
Speaking of Sanchez I ran into a book of his online recently called UFO Highway. I took a look at the table of contents and was amazed by the silliness in there. Somehow he managed to squeeze into that toc every foolish UFO subject there is, the alien interview, Dulce, S4, you name it. He was a guest on the Paracast? Gotta' say I'm a little surprised.
Click to expand...


He was roughed up pretty bad by Gene and Chris and it was well deserved. He was talking about his wacked out theories like they were proven fact.
 
Wickerman1972 said:
There's something wrong with your link. Isn't that from Cohen? I don't believe anything that guy says. Is anyone else saying the filmmakers have been identified?
Click to expand...

Sorry about the link
Yes, interview is with Cohen. I don't know about Mr. Cohen's past or reputation. I gather it isn't good. Still, he doesn't make any outrageous or strange claims in the interview. And he names names there, as well as on his blog. To me, this doesn't have the makings of a hoax, but, then, there's no way yet to be sure it isn't.
 
Back
Top