Listener Round Table

[Fcseven]

Great show guys. Can I suggest a show on hidden archeology since Chris brought it up.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Great show guys. Can I suggest a show on hidden archeology since Chris brought it up.

Yes, I second that. There are a few names, the late Phillip Coppen was good on that topic but I suppose the daddy has to be Michael Cremo - though if there are other names I'd be delighted to hear them.

@FCseven - just to be sure, I think there is a forum section 'about the show' in which you should really put requests for guests. Can't hurt to post something there too.....Gene and Chris can't read everything so it's better to spread your bets to make sure they see your idea?

 

[Jimi H.]

This thread is pretty typical of the global warming argument over all, the people that recognize that anthropogenic global warming is real want to talk about the science behind it and the opponents want to talk about the politics. ..

Exactly. I see it all the time.

At this point, I've concluded that some people don't want to know about the science.

Anyways, your post was most excellent, well done!

 

[Jimi H.]

Great show guys. Can I suggest a show on hidden archeology since Chris brought it up.

I like the whole idea of 'hidden' or 'forbidden' archeology, it's a bit like real-life Indiana Jones or Tintin or something.

That said, I've not been too impressed by e.g. Cremo. Typically the story will be something like this: Some people walked into a cave and they found something that 'shouldn't' have been there, and they brought it back home. Ok, fair enough. But if they want to 'prove' anything it's the wrong way to do it, and basically worthless to others, and to science.

Evidence is finding something embedded into rock, ice, or whatever, and not removing it before peers and scholars have had a chance to see it in situ. That's where Cremo and others drop the ball.

So, if there are cases where good practices have been followed, sure, it could be really interesting! Especially, if challenged by an actual archeologist.

Otherwise, I imagine it'd just be some good stories from Mr. Cremo et. al. No harm done, but no insight gathered either.
Cremo is a Hindu creationist and already there you know he might not really be all that much into science, even if he claims to be.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

I like the whole idea of 'hidden' or 'forbidden' archeology, it's a bit like real-life Indiana Jones or Tintin or something.

That said, I've not been too impressed by e.g. Cremo. Typically the story will be something like this: Some people walked into a cave and they found something that 'shouldn't' have been there, and they brought it back home. Ok, fair enough. But if they want to 'prove' anything it's the wrong way to do it, and basically worthless to others, and to science.

Evidence is finding something embedded into rock, ice, or whatever, and not removing it before peers and scholars have had a chance to see it in situ. That's where Cremo and others drop the ball.

So, if there are cases where good practices have been followed, sure, it could be really interesting! Especially, if challenged by an actual archeologist.

Otherwise, I imagine it'd just be some good stories from Mr. Cremo et. al. No harm done, but no insight gathered either.
Cremo is a Hindu creationist and already there you know he might not really be all that much into science, even if he claims to be.

I get what your are saying about some out-of-place-artefacts but perhaps have a look at the work of Klaus Dona - there are some stunningly advanced artefacts that seem to show things that should just not have been known when made. I highly recommend him and he has a few vids on youtube.

 

[pixelsmith]

I loved the round table ,and I am no tree hugger but I am in Ohio and it is 63 degrees today it is supposed to be a high of 18 degrees in two days time. That is not natural at all,politics aside nobody can convince me that there is not a climate shift going on

no one I know will argue that climate change is not happening, it is supposed to happen. Extreme climate events are how life evolves. If not for climate change we would not have polar bears, humans or millions of other species of animals and insects.

 

[pixelsmith]

This thread is pretty typical of the global warming argument over all, the people that recognize that anthropogenic global warming is real want to talk about the science behind it and the opponents want to talk about the politics. Al Gore, the Club of Rome, the guy at the IPCC writing porn, the allegations of conspiracy and carbon tax have nothing whatsoeverto do with the many decades of data that prove anthropogenic global warming is happening.

As much as Pixel wants to talk about the scientific method, he doesn't follow it, at all. If he did he would have a viable alternative hypothesis that explains the decades worth of varied sources of data that prove anthropogenic global warming is happening. Instead, he just throws out every untested, unproven counter argument from The Global Warming Deniers oops, Skeptics handbook by Joanne Nova oil company shill extraordinaire, in an attempt to cloud the issue further. That is not how science is done. It's typical of his entire side, it's a lot like the tactics that creationists employ when debating the age of the Earth and it gets about as much traction in scientific circles as the idea that the Earth is 6,000 years old. As I've explained time and time again, if you want to claim that you value science, you have an obligation to follow the scientific method and that includes the process of falsification. Until you do that, you can claim science all you want but it's about as convincing as Noah's Flood or Adam & Eve sharing the Earth with the dinosaurs.

This, is scientific reasoning:

So we can see that, like any scientific experiment, there are going to be predictions that are wrong, this is part of science, which is never 100% right the first time. Einstein's static universe theory was a failure, should we throw out relativity as well? Jefferson liked to impregnate his slaves, should we throw out the Constitution because he was a bit of a freak? No, the idea that we should throw out their work because someone wrote some porn or developed a theory that didn't pan out is patently ridiculous, the only thing I can think of that's worse is to throw out all of the ideas and data of many different people over several decades because you think that a few individuals might be corrupt. Which part of the scientific method is that?

Do I support carbon tax for corporations (which is what I think of when I hear "big polluters" btw) Absolutely. The idea that they're going to police themselves is completely and utterly at odds with the facts, which have shown time and time again that corporations will do whatever they have to do, at the expense of everyone else, to make a profit. How many times have you heard of a corporation moving into a small town, decimating their local economy and ecology through illegal practices and then paying a fine later as recompense? Too many to count, Pixel can verify that himself, just look at the history of Monsanto. So yeah, I think something that tells them that breaking the rules is no longer going to be economically feasible is a damn good idea, because money is the only language that they understand. Period.

I don't support a carbon tax on individuals because unlike corporations, people can and will change their behavior when we realize the impact that we're having on our environment. And we are having an impact, whether you want to admit it or not. The idea that pumping 27 gigatons per year of CO2 into the atmosphere is good is complete and utter nonsense. I don't know why I'm going over this again, we played this out to the extreme in the other thread but I can see that even after having every unproven alternative hypothesis rejected and proven mistaken, Pixel still hangs onto the idea that AGW is some big conspiracy. That's the biggest problem with him claiming science, science demands that your hypothesis be falsifiable and there's nothing any of us could say or do to convince most of these so called global warming skeptics that they're wrong. Most of them won't even admit the possibility that they could be wrong. You can throw out all the unproven conclusions that you want about ice ages and CO2 being great, but until you do the work to prove that, you have nothing but what you want to believe. There's a Nobel Prize waiting for one of you global warming skeptics to claim when you can disprove AGW through data and evidence and come up with a new hypothesis that explains the decades of verified research. It is a falsifiable hypothesis, unlike allegations of conspiracy.

Until you do that, all you have is belief, unfalsifiable, infallible belief, and that's not science.

/thread, for me anyway.

blah blah blah... Until you prove human generated CO2 is causing cooling, warming, climate change or whatever you will call it next... all YOU have is belief, unfalsifiable, infallible belief, and that's not science.

 

[Wade]

I loved the round table ,and I am no tree hugger but I am in Ohio and it is 63 degrees today it is supposed to be a high of 18 degrees in two days time. That is not natural at all,politics aside nobody can convince me that there is not a climate shift going on

Well everyone is probably in agreement that there is some climatic differences in effect but as one that spent 19 years growing up on northern new york I remember more than a few 60°+ days usually over a 2 day period then 50°-40°+ & after few more days it went back to typical sub freezing. It's a well established weather phenomena called january thaw.

Edit: in actuality if I looked back to that records at that period the temps probably topped out in the high 50°''s so if it's in the 60s now then that may be indicitive of changes going on but not the drastic rising and drops of the temperature itself. in my defense I'm talking about a period in the early-late 70s, I'm approaching old man territory now.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

Hey, does anybody know a good forum where they're talking about ghosts? Or the UFO mystery? Or any other paranormal phenomenon? I bet that would be a really cool forum. I guess I should go out and look for a forum like that.

Talking about UFO's and stuff like that, I really wanted to talk more about the future of UFO research on our Listener Round Table. One topic I think we really missed was that....what can we do to inject interest back into genuine UFO research? Does the information age that we now live in, lead to a dissolution of information, a short sightedness and small attention span that dilutes UFO research and leads to unfocused, untrained investigations? If so, how do we correct that? Or can we? Should we?

 

[Polterwurst]

Heh. Yeah, wouldn't it be nice to have a forum like that, where you could have informed, sober discussions about the actual phenomena that are being reported by credible witnesses but ignored by mainstream science. But I'm afraid on any such forum there will eventually be someone who's on on a crusade about some personal belief or non-belief of his (or hers). Oh well, what can you do.

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

Wow, wow and wow.

I appreciate those opinions that differ from mine. However, don't use the argumentative fallacy of those who disagree with 'me' are stupid, uneducated or otherwise not worthy of consideration (re:climate change).

The science isn't settled. That felicitous argument is typically used by those who don't possess the courage of their supposed convictions to accurately defend their position.

Why is it the most 'enlightened' among us resort to playground antics to squelch those who disagree?! I welcome descent. Why don't (the royal) you? If your opinion is so rock-solid, why the adversity to differing opinions? Be honest.

Also; I note how pro-global warming people tend to (almost) always resort to minimizing/belittling anyone who disagrees with them. Ever wonder why the person, rather than the argument, seems to be the issue?

Yeah, it really is that simple.

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

Hey, does anybody know a good forum where they're talking about ghosts? Or the UFO mystery? Or any other paranormal phenomenon? I bet that would be a really cool forum. I guess I should go out and look for a forum like that.

Talking about UFO's and stuff like that, I really wanted to talk more about the future of UFO research on our Listener Round Table. One topic I think we really missed was that....what can we do to inject interest back into genuine UFO research? Does the information age that we now live in, lead to a dissolution of information, a short sightedness and small attention span that dilutes UFO research and leads to unfocused, untrained investigations? If so, how do we correct that? Or can we? Should we?

Come on brother! Don't dismiss the conversation outright. If you don't care for it, just don't participate. Calling the forum into question for discussing the topic matter is out of bounds, IMOO.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

I think Jeff (Sandanfire) was jesting a little?

But I am with him in that I am surprised that out of the topics covered in the show, global warming has generated by far the most discussion. It's not like it's even a paranormal topic - it could be viewed as a conspiracy however but like I think Jeff is saying, I was hoping for more discussion on the non-global warming topics.

Mind you, Gene and Chris often express surprise at which shows generate a lot of forum activity and which do not. And it's not even necessarily related to how good a show was or how it was received, some of the best shows with a great guest get little mention in the forum and then you have for instance the Nancy Talbot + Robbert show which, although being a good show, I think surprised just about everyone in that people are still posting about it now after a good while!

 

[Wade]

Come on brother! Don't dismiss the conversation outright. If you don't care for it, just don't participate. Calling the forum into question for discussing the topic matter is out of bounds, IMOO.

I disagree, sandanfire has every right to bring it up, I'm sure it was not for nothing that he was among the first four picked to participate. I will say though the gw discussion probably shouldn't be unexpected as not a week goes by that this subject is not brought up in this forum and discussed quite passionately, so being this episode was about us (forum members) i think it's quite natural that this issue played so heavily, unlike other paracast episodes where the guest is usually about one particular issue.

 

[SlightlyAbovePar]

Okay - I appreciate & welcome your differing opinion =)

 

[SRL+]

Listening to the round table of 09' , there are a few striking similarities as to the experiences of the round table quests on this weeks show. There seems to be a recurring theme where various phenomena behave in a manner that suggests interaction with human consciousness, in performing for, or displaying it’s presence to the experiencer. This reminds me of what Robert Bigelow said about the phenomena occurring at the Gorman Ranch. His impression was that of putting on exhibitions for gamesmanship, or instruction. I like Knapp’s comment of “ the more we learn, the less we know.” This is so true.

 

[Randall]

Hey, does anybody know a good forum where they're talking about ghosts? Or the UFO mystery? Or any other paranormal phenomenon? I bet that would be a really cool forum. I guess I should go out and look for a forum like that. Talking about UFO's and stuff like that, I really wanted to talk more about the future of UFO research on our Listener Round Table. One topic I think we really missed was that....what can we do to inject interest back into genuine UFO research? Does the information age that we now live in, lead to a dissolution of information, a short sightedness and small attention span that dilutes UFO research and leads to unfocused, untrained investigations? If so, how do we correct that? Or can we? Should we?

Some really good insight there Sand. On the forum question: You're being facetious of course. The Paracast is the place to be On your question, "Does the information age that we now live in, lead to a dissolution of information, a short sightedness and small attention span that dilutes UFO research and leads to unfocused, untrained investigations?" There's no question about it. We've seen hundreds ( probably more like thousands ) of UFO sites pop up on the Internet. When I started USI I had hoped to unite the non MUFON people into something cohesive, but instead the Internet has made the field into more of a competition of opinions and a pet topic for web-design students than useful research. How do we correct it?

I don't think we can fight the technology so we have to be better than the rest and realize that there is also a positive side. The other thing is to help prevent those who are new to ufology from getting derailed by the skeptics on one side and the opportunists and fringe element on the other.

Reasons Why I Study Ufology:

1. I find ufology studies to be a rich source of education that expands my worldview.
2. Consequently, the entertainment that I enjoy, particularly sci-fi and the arts are also enriched by my knowledge of the theoretical science and ufology related facets that may play a role in the story or production.
3. I enjoy writing and creating, and ufology facilitates both. Example below:

Here's a little graphic I put together for the
AAH ( Ancient Astronaut Hypothesis ) on
the USI website.

By cloning in bits and pieces from several
free photos, enhancing them, and doing
some adjusting, I learned how to create
a new scene with my paint program !

So we don't have to believe in the AAH for it to fire our imaginations and inspire us to learn or create, and we don't all have to be Michaelangelo's or Leonardo's for what we create to be useful. In connection with the AAH, I also posted the "Ancient Aliens Debunked" video. It is very educational and should be watched by anyone who is into the AAH. At the same time, given certain myths and the reality of the UFO phenomenon, we also cannot be certain there were no ancient aliens. UFOs are a genuine mystery that adds spice to almost anything we want to learn about. I imagine it's much the same for you ( Sandanfire ) with your interest in the paranormal, and as we touched on in the Listener Round Table, perhaps there may be some overlapping elements.

 

[Forest Lake]

this is the first round table i have heard and this was an amazing show! i would certainly love to hear this format every month or two

 

[Jeff Crowell]

Come on brother! Don't dismiss the conversation outright. If you don't care for it, just don't participate. Calling the forum into question for discussing the topic matter is out of bounds, IMOO.

I'm not dismissing the conversation, I'm simply saying that, perhaps, HERE is not the place to discuss global warming. As UFOlogy pointed out, there more topics covered in the program, far more related to paranormal phenomenon. I'm all for debating the global warming topic, just not here. Perhaps an environmental form, or in the General Discussions thread of this same form? Wanting to stay on topic is not out of bounds at all.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

Here's a little graphic I put together for the

AAH ( Ancient Astronaut Hypothesis ) on
the USI website.

By cloning in bits and pieces from several
free photos, enhancing them, and doing
some adjusting, I learned how to create
a new scene with my paint program !

So we don't have to believe in the AAH for it to fire our imaginations and inspire us to learn or create, and we don't all have to be Michaelangelo's or Leonardo's for what we create to be useful. In connection with the AAH, I also posted the "Ancient Aliens Debunked" video. It is very educational and should be watched by anyone who is into the AAH. At the same time, given certain myths and the reality of the UFO phenomenon, we also cannot be certain there were no ancient aliens. UFOs are a genuine mystery that adds spice to almost anything we want to learn about. I imagine it's much the same for you ( Sandanfire ) with your interest in the paranormal, and as we touched on in the Listener Round Table, perhaps there may be some overlapping elements.

Very good work and extremely insightful, UFOlogy. Yes, the idea of alien contact does inspire the imagination and, I believe fuel the quest to learn more about even mundane topics. When I started looking into the haunting phenomena I took the angle that nearly topic could contribute to furthering the knowledge there. Over the last year or so I've gotten quite a bit more skeptical and embittered about the whole thing (as researchers are prone to do) but I may get over that hump.

UFO's and aliens in pop culture, I believe, are something you're really touching on, too. The reason why those b-rated movies about alien invasion were so popular in the '50's was because they inspired imagination and that resonated into the scientific community, encouraging research in astronomical endeavors. Of course it helped that the cold war was going on and we had the whole space-race thing happening but still, it fueled America's hunger to get off this planet and explore other worlds. After all if aliens were coming here, maybe someday we could visit their home planet, too? Unfortunately we, as a culture, have lost sight of that, and even semi-decent scifi movies aren't having the same effect about pushing our culture back into exploration mode, I think.

I also agree that the Internet can be angled as a positive tool as well. Consistency and persistance in using it will help; filtering out the 'noise' and emphasizing the 'signal' is the goal there, and I have to say that your website does that. Good job on that site, UFOlogy, and if/when you're on The Paracast again I think you should emphasize the work you've done there, even more.