I'm Just Wondering.

[PararealitySaint]

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <wunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <wontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> This might be construed by some of you as “blowing off steam”, and maybe I should consider it so, but honestly, I am sincerely wondering just what is in the mind of someone like George Noory of Coast to Coast Am.

I have been an “archived” listener to C2C as opposed to listening to the show live for about 3 years now, and perhaps I am slow to “getting it”, but lately I am finding it very difficult to believe he’s doing the paranormal world a favor by appeasing his guests the way he does all the time. I know he might be thought of by many listeners as a “nice guy”, but when one of his guests visits the show and begins ranting about aliens doing this, and proof that they influenced that, and it takes about an hour or so for the “lines” to open so that someone who actually lives on planet earth can get on the air and in fact question the insanity of their diatribe; one has to wonder why Mr. Noory just sits there and allows the guest to go off on such wild tangents all the time.

I understand there is a level of respect one should have in hosting a radio show, and I’m not saying he should berate the guest, but how about posing a question or two as to the “proof” or simple relevance of all the wild claims these guests provide?

This leads me to why I found the Paracast a few months ago and why I have never looked back.


Gene and his Guest Hosts allow the guest to speak their minds, but there comes a time when they have to be questioned on the crap they call “evidence”, and that is exactly what they do. It’s a breathe of fresh air in the Paranormal world and although we all have varying belief systems and opinions, there still has to be a level of assurance that the information presented is either hearsay or truly factual proof backed by physical substantiation.

At one point Mr. Noory infers after a caller, who let it be known that almost ninety five percent of what the guest was speaking about was panned as fakery, due to the original findings a professional organization investigated, that, “Well, some things are real for some people, and unreal for others.”

Lastly, the reason why I am posting this thread is to find out a few answers from those of you who might either agree or disagree with:

1. Do you believe the host of a radio show such as C2C or the Paracast have an obligation to review the material presented by the guest and either enlighten or reveal inadequacies in the content….not to do this by personal opinion but fairly inform as to the real facts?
2. If not, do you believe an audience should have both sides to every “opinion” based presentation, as in the pros and cons of said material in question during the show?
3. Are you finding yourself downloading more of the Paracast archives than C2C lately?

Thanks.

 

[tyder001]

The things you bring up have validity but it's just hard to know where to draw the line. Gene, Chris and the other host here do a good job of it. If you are to combative with your guest you run the risk of nobody wanting to talk with you. There are two many "peaceful" outlets out there. On the other hand if you appease and never question then it looks like you are endorsing every theory and statement your guest is making. As to "both sides" it depends. I'm not one who enjoys a full on yelling match between the true believer and the true atheist. Everybody talks over each other and nobody learns anything. For instance try (I dare ya) to make sense out of some the Larry King episodes where people are yelling and talking over each other and exaggerating the other persons position. It's a mess. But, to present a posistion and have the host bring up a opposing position in a firm but respectful manner can make for good radio. It is called the Paracast and so I do get irritated when some folks act as if discussing in a serious manner things that go bump in the night or flash in the sky is silly. But, I don't think that is what you are saying. I hope I have at least made a little sense with my answer.

 

[PararealitySaint]

I'm not one who enjoys a full on yelling match between the true believer and the true atheist. Everybody talks over each other and nobody learns anything.

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <wunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <wontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> Thank you for your reply and I agree with you, everyone is here to discuss the paranormal and no one should want to berate another for the purpose of a good brawl or yelling match.

Although we see eye to eye on the above, at what level do you have to draw the line? There has to be some coherent sense to it all though, and in the process a relevancy to just why it is we are interested in in the first place. If I was to put on a radio program that dealt mainly in fantasy stories, wouldn’t it be strange if I decided one day to change the format and quote the news of the day? The audience would find surprise in this and then have to question whether or not they feel the change in content was done in a sound judgment. I believe they would use a measure of introspection which included the originating importance to their taste.

In the case of C2C I might never have had the chance to know the difference as I was only a listener for a few years or so. I will state this for the record though, I much rather enjoy content presented with evidence attained and then discuss “opinions” as to what the relevance of it is. In this way both the host as well as the listener is staved from being too isolated in sharing.

 

[saucerwench]

I'm glad you made this thread. I have been building up inner steam about George Noory lately. Firstly, yes Noory is a "nice guy", but I seriously often wonder if his I.Q. has a lowness problem. Or if he needs to get into drinking some dangerously dark StarBucks brew. I have often heard him respond "Absolutely!" to a statement of a guest, no matter what the statement was, as if G.N. was not listening. Or as if he was not grasping the guest's concept, because it was TOO --complicated-- for G.N. This is something that just drives me out of my tree, and back up there again. Absolutely! It's like he's a dumb bimbo, while appearing as an ageing homely guy.

 

[tyder001]

I was a big fan of the show during the Art Bell years. Not because Art was always on target but because he knew how to conduct an interview. His interviews with Father Malachai Martin are text book as to how to let a guest tell his/her story and blend the questions without being overpowering. George Noory is a cooperate shill and I hate that. They are getting into the whole political and conspiracy stuff with a dash of "health food and nutrition" thrown in to bore your socks off. I think if you listen to Gene interview the likes of David Jacobs and Bud Hopkins you have a good measuring stick as to how to conduct an in depth interview. Not nasty and not offensive but to the point and questions raised. I would love to see the Paracast be able to have a call in show with guest and conduct it over four hours a night. I do tune into CNN or FOX or ABC,NBC,CBS and other outlets for news and I agree about that. Noory has a bad habit of phoning it in and even running repeats of the last hour of a previous show on Fridays. I finally had to cancel my streamlink. I enjoyed having the interviews without the commercials but the Norry stuff and even some of the guest (A dude that thinks he's a frickin horse in a man's body) just turned me off. It's to bad because they do get some excellent guest mixed in with the bad ones. Dr. Kaku and Raymond Moody and George Knapp hosting and Richard Dolan and others as guest. But, the slop you have to wade through to get to them just wasn't worth it.

---------- Post added at 08:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:52 PM ----------

Saucerwench I have thought the same thing about the "bimbo" thing. He colors his hair and tries so hard to be relevant. I don't hate him and I think he is more than likely a good guy. But, he is killing that show.

 

[saucerwench]

Saucerwench I have thought the same thing about the "bimbo" thing. He colors his hair and tries so hard to be relevant. I don't hate him and I think he is more than likely a good guy. But, he is killing that show.

His haircolor has been too strong and dark for his age. I have seen lots of times that Richard Dolan colored his hair, then, the next time, it looked pretty gray. (The Grays!) http://www.greyorgray.com/ But it never looked innapropriately dark. Tyd, I like George Knapp as a host for Coast. He is really --sharp--. Even though Don Ecker and I are political opposites, I think Ecker is a knockdowndragout host. A very sharp interviewer, lively, clear and smart. I think someone should try him out for Coast. Tyd, there is something about Ian Punnit that has me biting off and then spitting out my nails out of frustration. I -think- that, it sounds like he is smiling all the time while he is talking. I CANNOT ABIDE that. It just drives me up a tree, and then back out of it again.

 

[tyder001]

The one redeeming thing about Ian is that he actually "reads" the books his guest write. Other than that he tries to hard to be cool. Maybe he and George Noory have the same problem in that area. I do agree there is an appropiate time to have a little touch up but Noory (as you pointed out) is just to much. I do like George Knapp and yes Don would be a great host.

 

[saucerwench]

I don't hate G.N. either, and think he is basically a good person otherwise as well.

 

[PararealitySaint]

Thank you guys for responding to this. I totally agree that the Martin Interviews were some of the best Art Bell ever did, as I had the chance to hear them from the archives.

George Knapp is an interesting person. I am very proud of the fact that he is doing so much for the wild Mustang.

I am not a big fan of Ian's although I do agree that at least he reads the books of the people he interviews.

 

[Kandinsky]

It's interesting that Linda Moulton-Howe has never been seen in the same place as George Noory. Both are completely credulous and have the ability to make agreeable sounds and nods whilst listening to fantasists. Has anyone tugged on the moustache? Is it time to do a comparative analysis on the blink-rate of Noory and LMH?

The impression I get from Noory's interview style is that he couldn't name the person he's just interviewed if you asked him to count to ten first.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

It's interesting that Linda Moulton-Howe has never been seen in the same place as George Noory. Both are completely credulous and have the ability to make agreeable sounds and nods whilst listening to fantasists. Has anyone tugged on the moustache? Is it time to do a comparative analysis on the blink-rate of Noory and LMH?

The impression I get from Noory's interview style is that he couldn't name the person he's just interviewed if you asked him to count to ten first.

If anyone cares, there's a forum or blog of Noory fans that is attacking The Paracast now because we don't believe their idol is the way and the truth among paranormal radio shows. I'm serious, folks!

At least we're important enough to be attacked.

 

[Kandinsky]

I think Ecker is a knockdowndragout host. A very sharp interviewer, lively, clear and smart. I think someone should try him out for Coast.

Great idea. I disagree with Don on a regular basis, but he's got more personality, charisma and experience than the regular C2C hosts.

 

[PararealitySaint]

If anyone cares, there's a forum or blog of Noory fans that is attacking The Paracast now because we don't believe their idol is the way and the truth among paranormal radio shows. I'm serious, folks!

At least we're important enough to be attacked.

LOL! Gene, could you please post the URL as I would love to see just what they have to say when I pose a few questions pertaining to their insight into "the way and the truth....?"

 

[Gene Steinberg]

LOL! Gene, could you please post the URL as I would love to see just what they have to say when I pose a few questions pertaining to their insight into "the way and the truth....?"

Frankly, I saw it early in the morning, via a Google link. I didn't bother to write it down, but I'm quite sure that it's easily searched.

 

[PararealitySaint]

Frankly, I saw it early in the morning, via a Google link. I didn't bother to write it down, but I'm quite sure that it's easily searched.

Understood.

Gene,

Personally I don't care what they write. You continue to do the job both you and your Guest Hosts are doing, and I and many others here in the South will continue to listen. You have the better show of the two as far as we are concerned, and although I recently became a Paracast fan, I can honestly say I wouldn't hesitate on turning off C2C to turn on the Paracast any day!

Lastly, tell Nick Redfern for me that I think he made an excellent Guest host and Many of us consider him to be one of the better men in this field today.

James

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Nick will be back many times in the months to come. Greg Bishop will make a guest appearance on our next episode, about which you'll hear more shortly.

 

[PararealitySaint]

Nick will be back many times in the months to come. Greg Bishop will make a guest appearance on our next episode, about which you'll hear more shortly.

Excellent. Greg is also included in that statement (excellent and interesting individual) and thanks again for continuing to ensure the quality of the programming doesn't fade into the world of "mythical fact"......Someone say Oxy"MORON."

 

[Office 4256]

Rule #1: Follow the money.

Yes, I think it sometimes is hard to know where the cutoff point should be, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be one. Let's face it, the sponsors of C2C rely as much on late night travelers and long-distance truckers as the hard-core fans who have been listening since the Art Bell days. Totally outlandish markets better than reasoned argument on AM radio at three in the morning.

 

[Decker]

Great idea. I disagree with Don on a regular basis, but he's got more personality, charisma and experience than the regular C2C hosts.
Originally Posted by saucerwench I think Ecker is a knockdowndragout host. A very sharp interviewer, lively, clear and smart. I think someone should try him out for Coast.

Well thanks Guys for the vote of confidence but just let me say this. First, I never input my political leanings into an interview. I also never try to "overtalk my guest." I am on the air each night ( well when CyberstationUSA is ON THE AIR) so I never felt like I didn't get a chance to say my piece.

As far as politics go, there are too many people and shows out there that cover politics. That is one reason why Dwight Schultz and I no longer do radio. Dwight loves politics and I don't. I do love the paranormal beat and I try to keep it there. Rich will occasionally go on a political rant and he knows I do not like it. Oh, I do have my political thoughts and ideas but I do not want them on DMR. For one thing, I do have a temper and politics will cause my temper to rise ... ergo I try to stay away from things of a political nature ... unless it might cross with military affairs. You all know I am a Vet and when politics take a dump on military guys and gals I have been known to open my mouth ... sometimes a lot. So there, had my say. And Kandinsky, what in Hell do we disagree on?

Decker

 

[Wickerman1972]

Seems pretty simple to me. C2C is a big, commercial, mainstream kind of show. It's about entertainment, not about education or investigation or anything like that. Sure, some of us like guests to be on the receiving end of tough questions but there are plenty of people out there that do not want that. When I listen to C2C I just try to think about it like reading a book. When you read a book you get one viewpoint. There isn't someone lobbing criticisms from the margins. If you like the book you keep going. If you think it's ridiculous you stop. C2C does its thing, the Paracast does its thing. Not everything has to be the same.