• 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!

Guest Suggestions for The Paracast

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Digital Trickster said:
Chuck Missler would be interesting but he seems like he cant seperate his religious beliefs from his research so he already is tainted from this while Jaques on the other hand can.Still might be a good show :)
Click to expand...
I agree in that it does seem that, more often than not, Chuck Missler does include his religious views... but, he also does bring much insight from a scientific standpoint; his research is vast and solid, and his background has been vetted. I have seen many instances where Dr. Missler has been proffessional enough to approach a topic solely from a scientific and investigative perspective; he does make it a point to clearly state what is just conjecture... his or otherwise. I really believe that Gene's & Chris's extensive knowledge in the field of ufology, and thier tenacity when it comes to drawing out pertinent information, is substantial enough to help keep the religious aspect at bay. Even if some of it is inevitably presented by Dr. Missler as a way of explaining his motivation towards his research, the science of it is immutable... it can also serve as a refreshing "new" perspective from which listeners might take an additional approach in thier individual research efforts. I still think that it would make a very interesting show; moreso if it could be conducted in a roundtable forum, or maybe even a respectable "stand-off" debate similar to the one with Stanton Friedman from a few episodes past. Lol, anyways... The Paracast ROCKS!!! Lol.
 
I'd like to hear anything non-UFO related for a while. Don't get me wrong, I love the UFO topic but it is 90+% the focus on this show.

Some topics I'd like to hear about are:
1) Any further experiments regarding Michel Gauchelin's work on the biological effects of planetary astrology
2) More experiments with OOBEs and remote viewing
3) Anything demonstrable

It seems like people like Aaron Kaplan are on because the UFO thing has gone as far as it can go for now without more evidence to support some of the claims made.
 
Ingo Swann, Joseph P. Farrell, Dr. Remo F. Roth, Dr. Paul laviolette, Nick Redfern, William Bodri, George P.Hansen, Don Ecker, Peter Levenda, Paul & Ben Eno, Klaus Dona, Rich Sarradet, Dr. William Tiller, Richard Alan Miller, Ann Druffel, Brent Raynes, Scott Corales, Christopher O' Brien, Jim Schnabel, Brad Steiger, & Kenn Thomas

That's it :)
 
Hi,

I would like to see / hear :richard Haines

but also R Hoagland, but in this case , realy "attack" him....

as it seems nobody nowadays goes against him...every body is just believing him.....






Facius_Cardan said:
Here go some guest suggestions:

- Erling Strand from Hessdalen Project (I had already suggested him I know);
- Clas Svahn from UFO Sweden (no, its not a Scandinavian conspiracy, but I think Clas is a very serious investigator of the UFO phenomena);
- James Bunnell (Marfa lights investigator);
- Richard F. Haines/ Ted Roe both of NARCAP (they have a new cooperation protocol with CEFAA, the chilean UFO investigation organization, and it would be interesting to have news about new pilot cases);
- Chris Aubeck (more info about the "Wonders in the sky" book and the Magonia Exchange);
Click to expand...
 
Are you interested in doing the 9/11 conspiracy? In general, there doesn't seem to be legitimate doubt about what happened. But the collapse of building 7 really is weird and suspicious.
 
wwkirk said:
Are you interested in doing the 9/11 conspiracy? In general, there doesn't seem to be legitimate doubt about what happened. But the collapse of building 7 really is weird and suspicious.
Click to expand...
I do think we've touched on this briefly, particularly with the Jesse Ventura interview.

April 10, 2011 — Former Governor Jesse Ventura

We'd revisit this if we can find a guest with some compelling evidence to offer that isn't easily refuted.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
I do think we've touched on this briefly, particularly with the Jesse Ventura interview.

April 10, 2011 — Former Governor Jesse Ventura

We'd revisit this if we can find a guest with some compelling evidence to offer that isn't easily refuted.
Click to expand...

There are several groups. Scientists for 9/11 truth, Scholars for 9/11 truth, and Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth. Steven E. Jones stands out as a truther scientist who has published on the matter. Here is his homepage: http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/
 
wwkirk you might as well give up on that 9/11 show. it is obvious that most of the minds here are closed on the subject. even tho there is more evidence in support of a controlled demolition than the official story, most people here would rather believe the fairy tale that 2 planes brought down 3 buildings as a result of 99 cent box cutters.
 
It's just group think Pixel. Nobody likes to get outside the box. That's why you get people who look for a guru be it religious or scientific or entertainment related. Once you get that ole "tin foil" hat title on ya then you are done. Notice the smirks on the faces of news anchors when they discuss ufo's or when a third party political movement comes along? Notice that it's OK to make call the Pope a Nazi if your from Hollywood but ya better not say anything about the Messiah in D.C.? Nope, not defending the Pope but just sayin. :p I don't know if the buildings were brought down or if there was a conspiracy. But, it does deserve at least as much respect and attention as having a professor from Tulane come on and hypnotise folks over a damn telephone.
 
tyder001 said:
It's just group think Pixel. Nobody likes to get outside the box. That's why you get people who look for a guru be it religious or scientific or entertainment related. Once you get that ole "tin foil" hat title on ya then you are done. Notice the smirks on the faces of news anchors when they discuss ufo's or when a third party political movement comes along? Notice that it's OK to make call the Pope a Nazi if your from Hollywood but ya better not say anything about the Messiah in D.C.? Nope, not defending the Pope but just sayin. :p I don't know if the buildings were brought down or if there was a conspiracy. But, it does deserve at least as much respect and attention as having a professor from Tulane come on and hypnotise folks over a damn telephone.
Click to expand...

More money was spent on investigating Clintons blow jobs. Seriously.
 
This is my last mention concerning a 9/11 guest. I'm no expert, but I've heard Steven E. Jones on other broadcasts and he comes off as quite credible. Even Chris O'Brien thinks there is something fishy about building 7. Anyway, here's a link to a peer-reviewed scientific article that Dr. Jones co-wrote concerning 9/11. http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf. Its too technical for me, but it gives a good idea of the level of sophistication he is operating on.

I'm not really a 9/11 truther, but I think that the subject merits looking into. I think Jones would measure up to the critical standards desired of Paracast guests. He's definitely less wacky than a couple of the guests who have sneaked through.http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf
 
Yeah i meant with you and Chris being interviewed not just you cause it was great hearing yours and Davids opinions together and would make for a good show to hear Chris with you this time.
 
Back
Top