• 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!

July 4, 2010 Episode - Walter Bosley

Forums New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
CapnG said:
I enjoyed the episode although I have to take issue with a couple of things:

1) Slagging people who like to use logic. As opposed to what, exactly? Your gut? Blind faith? Tea leaves? Divining rods? Beliefs are for children, adults want to KNOW things.
Click to expand...

You forgot goat entrails (ok ...you had divination through tea leaves), superstition, magical thinking, baseless assumptions, dreams, drug induced altered states, hearsay, and revealed knowledge. Those are apparently the accepted alternatives to the scientific method, reason, logic, and common sense and the favorites of witch doctors, religious hucksters, snake oil salesmen, confidence men, and politicians since we fell out of the trees.
 
owlsseered said:
My favorite part of the episode other than Walter Bosley's lecturing was the following quote around 54:57 regarding his "beyond top secret" clearance...

walterbosleybeyondtopsecret - walter bosley on the paracast.
Click to expand...
It's the biggest fallacy out there. Hell an electrician wiring a light switch in a sensitive area(say Groom Lake for instance) may have a top secret clearance. Doesn't mean they let him in on Presidential briefings. We need to all understand that possessing a clearance of any kind only means you have been vetted as trustworthy enough to do your job and not go blabbing about it all over town. The concept of compartmentalization of sensitive material seems to be lost on some people.
 
In brief : I sympathised with Walter's views in the discussion on the forum about the uses and abuses of scientific method but the manner in which he 'addressed' the debate on the show made him come across as simply intolerant of disagreement and rational inquiry.
 
I can't express enough disappointment in 1. allowing this fraud and liar to speak on the show and 2. allowing this fraud and liar to speak on the show AGAIN!

I've been a listener of the Paracast since episode 1. In that time I think I've learned to detect BS pretty fast. A lot of that ability CAME in part from listening to the Paracast and it's approach to this subject.

So point blank - this guy is full of sh*t... and it's obvious.
And what's worse... he's a BAD liar.

It has been an insult to every discerning listener of the show BOTH times he has been on.

Good luck with your upcoming syndication of the show.
If you want to be taken seriously, please keep the focus on people who aren't full of sh*t.
If you want big ratings and you want to further pollute the pool, keep the liars coming!
Your call.
 
I think you're going overboard here. We all have our BS detectors in place, and Greg Bishop has determined that Bosley has the professional credentials he claims to have. You can certainly look for other explanations to his experiences, if you wish. But saying he's full of it is going way too far.

As to the network. It's a distribution deal, period. We aren't changing the show's content. It'll be a tad more rigid in terms of the flow of discussion as we have fixed network commercial breaks. But that's normal.
 
lancemoody said:
Just giving tantalizing... hints of what your role was in a top secret project could be considered a breach of security...
Click to expand...

Not to cast doubt on anyone's claims here but funny you should say that. Over the years I have worked with numerous individuals with various different types of security clearances (something I have never had to have b.t.w.) Even after working side by side with the guys for years and becoming close friends with many all I ever got out of them when asked about the activities and projects those clearances covered were grunts and pained looks. They were even reluctant to even admit to having clearances most of the time. One fellow who served aboard a nuclear submarine made it clear to me (in the most polite and strained manner) that he could not and would not ever discuss anything whatsoever about it, even refusing to name the submarine. After a while I just got to where I'd grunt and looked pained back at them in sympathy because given what we were doing in the public sector, I knew they had to have worked on some damn interesting stuff that they would have loved to talk about (engineers and technicians being how they are). One of the closest friends I've had in my life finally took me aside and said, "Goddammit Rick, I still stand to be interviewed and questioned on a regular basis about that work, anything I say most definitely will come out in the interview, so cut me some slack will ya?" I stopped asking stupid questions ...or uh at least stupid questions about that sort of thing after that. In my experience, those boys don't talk about that business. Your mileage may vary.
 
lancemoody said:
Civilian: What are you guys up to there in New Mexico?
Captain Bosley: (a fictional WWII officer): Oh we are up to something. Wink. Wink. Wink!
Civilian: Is it related to the war?
Captain Bosley: Could be..giggle giggle.
Civilian: Is it a weapon?
Captain Bosley: I can neither confirm nor deny! Ha Ha. Wink. Wink.
Click to expand...

Captain Bosley: By the way did I mention that since 1988 I've had a TOP SECRET Clearance......(Long pause).......... Beyond...... (Another long pause) top secret.
Civillian: Errr..... shouldn't that be secret??? :confused:

Seriously though his "I hate agnostics" rant.... Errr.... except Greg Bishop, (coz he's different) was highly amusing.
 
Although I don't see eye to eye with Mr. Bosley, I would prefer if you guys didn't make fun of him because I do want him to respond. I don't want this thread to devolve into that.
 
Angel of Ioren said:
Although I don't see eye to eye with Mr. Bosley, I would prefer if you guys didn't make fun of him because I do want him to respond. I don't want this thread to devolve into that.
Click to expand...

It also means closed threads and bans. Can't you skeptics be civil and just ask your questions -- nicely?
 
Walter Bosley seems to lump all paranormal into one bucket. Also, he exhibited a Lazar-ian cavalier attitude about credibility and evidence--inserting some ontological foundation statements regarding subjective experience. I could almost hear Gene "chomping at the bit" when Bosley brushed off a challenge to Hoagland's credibility by stating, in effect, that one "kook" is as "good as the next" (paraphrase)--as if all claims concerning the "paranormal" were by nature born "kooky." At the end of the interview he became more or less agreeable to other alternatives while (quite elegantly) holding on to his own view.

I do agree with Bosley on the importance of personal identification transparency--and I also liked the "soccer game" analogy applied to those who hated the topic and yet continued to engage others in open forum.

Which is why Bosley will forgive me for drawing parallels between his presentation style and that of Lazar's
 
Look I really don't see any problem with this. It's all in jest and should to be taken too seriously. If Walter is offended then I apologise.

I see it like this

  • Walter came on the Show May 30th, made some pretty wild statements.
  • On the show Walter claimed he "didn't care" if people believed him or not.
  • Understandably there was a reaction to his claims in the forums which created a discussion
  • Walter kindly visited the forums and people asked questions
  • It was promply made clear if you want to question Walter with logic, then he's not interested.
  • Watler appears on the show July 4th alludes to a few more wild claims and then on air takes a shot at "logic lovers", Agnostics and any one else who wanted to explore his claims. (Except Greg)
For the record I think Gene did a good job trying to get Walter to explain further, Walter just wasn't going to do it.

Everyone is entitled to their own BS detector system, whether that involves logic or not. Walter (As ex FBI, Air Force) should understand this as he even said he stopped questioning events and started taking things for how they appear to him. Which infers he used to question occurences.

This is a paranormal chat show, listeners include believers, sceptics and agnostics whether Walter likes it or not we are his audience, when he writes his next (paranormal) book people from each camp will buy it for a read and ask questions and discuss... Thats what this industry is based on.
 
lancemoody said:
Hmm... if my earlier comments above are close to bannable offenses then discussing things here is a lot more tricky than I imagined.

"One horse-laugh is worth ten thousand syllogisms" -H.L. Mencken

Lance
Click to expand...

All we have to do is be civil and it wont come to that. However you feel about his story, he should be treated with a measure of respect. It is too easy to be rude on the internet. This forum should and does hold its members to a higher standard.
 
While scrolling thru this msg. base I saw some very nasty ad hominem type attacks with a forum member that for just a second made me think Phil Klass was back from the dead. What bull shit.

For what it is worth I have had Walter Bosley on DMR and have spent some time with him. He showed me his credentials. Ask me if I think he was counter intel. with the FBI. Okay, he was. As me if he was AFOSI. Yes again. Now having had Walter on my show much of what Walter spoke about was his reaction to things that have happened in his life. One thing I saw was someone here calling him a liar. Well, had that happened in the Dark Matters Radio forum I would have given the user in question one day to either show ME how Walter Bosley lied or for the user to tell Walter and the forum he was sorry or I would have tossed the guy. This is The Paracast damn it, not the Open Minds Forum. If you disagree with his conclusions .. fine. If not debate the guy using your logic. But this ad hominem shit is just that ... shit.

As far as Walter's comments about using names... well you all know my name, you know Gene's name, you know Paul Kimball's name and Chris O'Briens name ... and Walter Bosley's name. If some anonymous clown using only a screen name called me a liar on a public forum ... my gut reaction would be to want to have him tell me to my face. Then I would handle it there. Wouldn't you?

Decker
Don Ecker
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
Well Hell's Bell's Lance, I don't buy EVERYTHING Greg sells. So ... what is YOUR POINT?

Decker
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
lancemoody said:
I gotta spell it out? Saying you don't buy something someone is saying may euphemistically sound nicer but essentially you are saying you think he is lying.

Lance
Click to expand...

Okay Pal, lets ask Greg Bishop .... Greg! Do You Think Walter Bosley is Lying?? Come on Greg, Inquiring Minds Want to Know!

Decker

PS So Lance, when Greg Bishop answers ... And IF he says No, he doesn't think Walter is Lying, are you going to give apologies to Walter Bishop? If not, CAN YOU PROVE HE LIED?

Decker
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden"><input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top