Listening to This Week's Show

[David Biedny]

Well, you're right about getting away from the keyboard. This can be quite maddening and it's quite a nice day here in the city.

Tell me, what were you saying with that post?

You're in NYC, right?

It is truly gorgeous out, I need to go for a walk.

What I was saying, was....

I love marzipan. The real stuff, not that waxy crap they sell in Brooklyn.

dB

 

[hopeful skeptic]

I think youre missing the point, or I didnt get to really elaborate enough on the show due to time...who knows.

What I'm getting at is the perception of the experience, and how seamless at times it can be. What I think is that due to the obvious ability to effect perception that these events have, is it not possible that "experiencers" arent the rare ones. At least not in the sense that they *have* the experience. Perhaps it's more that they can recall it (or some hard to percieve version of it).

I dont have any real evidence that everyone, or even 50% has the experience, but it's just a gut feeling that there's nothing particularly rare about experiencers other then the ability of recall of the event.

None of this addresses the salient point: there is no hard evidence for any of these claimed experiences. Anecdotal, unsupported, eyewitness accounts are not evidentiary. Until the reality of any of these claimed experiences can be proven, we're all just swapping stories. That is not reasonable, does not get us anywhere, and will not lead to "truth."

Really, I'll thank ya not to put words in my mouth. What I said was it doesnt match to anything I've experienced, but it's possible Sparks is relating what his perception is. Whether it's right or not, who knows.

When you were trying to decide whether to believe Mr. Sparks or not, or trying to decide what in Mr. Sparks' account you might believe, you were engaging in critique. Please see my post to Hawk, on this thread. "Critique" does not necessarily mean "debunk."

I simply suggested that the idea of one person who touts unsupported, evidentially void stories analyzing the veracity of another person who touts unsupported, evidentially void stories is worth a healthy giggle.

Personally, I find the internal inconsistencies in Mr. Sparks' account sad and morbidly amusing. I guess the lesson for a claimant is that the story should be as bizarre and unconnected as possible so as to guard against the possibility of internal contradiction.

As far as lumping "alien" experience under the umbrella of "paranormal": Not exactly what I meant, but lets go with it.

Well, you're on a paranormal show, so if this material isn't considered part of the "paranormal" movement, why are you discussing it on that forum?

Youre right, not a damned bit of solid tangible evidence, just like ghosts, etc....so whats that tell you?

Do you really want me to answer that?

Is it so hard to envision that we're dealing with something so far past the nuts and bolts crap (which hasnt yielded *anything* in what...60 years?) that for us it exists on the very edge of perception?

"Nuts and bolts crap." Well, the "nuts and bolts" crowd can at least offer some hard radar target reports, some interesting physical trace evidence and some interesting documentation. We skeptics can analyze what they offer, and accept or reject some of their evidence, but they're offering something.

What do you contactees offer us? Stories. Anecdotes. Where is your physical evidence? Where is your corroboration? Where?

The contactee movement has origins as far back as the early 50s, at least. If we wait until 2010, and no contactee has provided us with a scrap of evidence, can we all move on and shelve this movement and its claims, as you have done with the "nuts and bolts" crowd and their "crap?" Will you be willing to shelve the movement, doubt your own claimed experiences, and apply the same measure to your own beliefs that you apply to the "nuts and bolts" crowd?

Man I'll say it again, I dont for a second believe the answers (or any of the real questions) will ever be found in UFOlogy alone. People need to open their thinking up past "aliens" and start looking into the nature of perception and reality, and seeing the absolute commonality of all paranormal events.

A few lines ago, you didn't lump aliens in with the paranormal, but now you're telling us that they share a "commonality" with "all paranormal events." Do you see the contradiction?

 

[interestedINitall]

You're in NYC, right?

It is truly gorgeous out, I need to go for a walk.

What I was saying, was....

I love marzipan. The real stuff, not that waxy crap they sell in Brooklyn.

dB

Uh huh. So you're not going to say. Okay

 

[DVS]

I wouldnt mind hearing some more photo/video analysis from Jeff Ritzman as opposed to discussing experiences (how about that Labour Day ufo vid??). The Russian UFO guest was really good, too.

 

[hopeful skeptic]

By the way, I certainly "stand by" the idea that telling people that most of them have experienced "something" can be a tactic (yes, a tactic) however, that doesn't mean that you were necessarily using it.

You were absolutely correct to point out the tactic. It's an appeal to popularity, which is bad argumentation. Actually, this is more an appeal to claimed popularity, since Mr. Ritzmann admits in another post, on this thread, that he has no evidence to support the 50% figure.

I grew up in the church, watch a variety of cable news shows, love to read editorials, etc., and I see preachers, talking heads and newspapermen use this tactic all the time. "Everybody knows that...;" "only idiots believe..;" "we all know that...," etc.

You and I part company on the whole "too binary" claim, but you were absolutely right to point this out, and courageous to stand by it. It was not an ad hominem attack, it was correctly identified, bad argumentation.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Strongbad hitting on your woman Marzipan David.

Compy 386!

Psst, don't tell David, but I think he's flipped his lid like so many in this field finally. It woulda happened to me, but I never had a lid.

 

[jritzmann]

So, as long as the "disagreement" is framed in a way that makes you feel comfortable everything is okay? That hardly seems fair.

No.

Fair is a discussion were a certain amount of respect is involved. I dont see respect in "con" or "tactic". I've done my damnedest to be forthright and honest in my discussion on what I've seen personally. I dont get paid nor will I ever take money for any of this...so when I see my name quoted and the word con used it no less then pisses me off.

And people wonder why others dont wanna talk about this stuff when this is the kind of smarmy crap you have to deal with.

If it didnt apply to me, then that should be stated within that post. You didnt.

Youre fine to sit back and use insultive terms but I'm wrong for calling you on it. Interesting world you live in.

If nothing else, this exchange has taught me a lot and I will listen to future shows will "different" ears.

Good for you. End of discussion for me. Dont worry you probably wont have to endure me on the show again. I learned my lesson.

 

[pixelsmith]

i know exactly what jeff is talking about. i recently had a UFO experience and last year a couple of paranormal experiences. friends and family think i am crazy. i related the paranormal experiences to david and didnt hear squat back from him. it made me feel as if he is the only one that can experience these types of things and that i was just a loon. i have pretty thick skin so i just blew it off to him being too busy to reply to me.

 

[interestedINitall]

Good for you. End of discussion for me. Dont worry you probably wont have to endure me on the show again. I learned my lesson.

Good lord! See, now why do you assume that "learning a lot" means that I don't like you?

You just jump to conclusions without ever asking for clarification. Yes, we all do it (I did it with David earlier) but when questioned one should ask for clarification (as I did).

If you don't want to do the show anymore that's your business don't try to put the onus on me!

Good lord!

I hope you're reconsider that. I found your and David's analysis of the airport UFO evidence quite interesting.

I've done my damnedest to be forthright and honest in my discussion on what I've seen personally. I dont get paid nor will I ever take money for any of this...so when I see my name quoted and the word con used it no less then pisses me off.

And people wonder why others dont wanna talk about this stuff when this is the kind of smarmy crap you have to deal with.

If it didnt apply to me, then that should be stated within that post. You didnt.

Why do you assume, that the things I've written here are an indictment of you and your story? How many times do I have to write that I was pointing out a tactic and not necessarily saying that you are perpetrating a "con?" Fine, if you thought I was writing about you directly but since that initial misunderstanding I've written a few times to state I was not necessarily accusing you of using the tactic but you don't seem to want to believe what I'm writing.

You say that you have to endure a lot of criticism and ridicule. I don't doubt it. This may be the cause of this hypersensitivity but when you counter the merest notion of skepticism with this level of anger and disregard for what is actually being said, it just makes you look crazy. That, just like the tactic dynamic, works from both ends.

FOR THE RECORD: Arguing from a point of fabricated consensus is a tactic. I do not necessarily think that Jeff Riztmann is using that tactic. I have no problem with Jeff's appearances on the show and have, in fact, rather enjoyed them.

 

[jritzmann]

"but when you counter the merest notion of skepticism with this level of anger and disregard for what is actually being said, it just makes you look crazy."

I know how I read it, and how it came forth, and how many emails I got about it. I'm not the least bit angry about skepticism, and even stated so on the show multiple times. I expect skeptical questions, and I have no issue with them. It's the whole connotation of "con" I dont appriciate.

You say you didnt mean it that way, thats fine, bygones. Am I hypersensitive to that kind of thing, absolutely. I defy anyone who's life has been impacted by this not to be. You have to look at it this way from me: I was asked to talk about experiences that I'm not 100% comfortable with; but they are important for some to know, so I did it. Then I come here and see the words "con" and "tactic", in response to my comments. Think about what those words mean, and how it'd make someone feel in response to a sensitive subject like this.

"Why do you assume, that the things I've written here are an indictment of you and your story?"
See post #7 and really read it.

It becomes in my view completely worthless to speak on this subject when I see that. What benefit does it really serve.

The only thing I apologize for is by nature I'm short fused, so I'm sorry for that.

 

[pixelsmith]

David, Gene AND Jeff should be given awards for their efforts. Seriously.

what they have done for this field is FAR superior to any i have EVER watched, listened to or read. they are on my HIGHEST pedestal.

i personally THANK THEM IMMENSELY from the bottom of my heart.

 

[cottonzway]

Wow, I didn't expect this to turn into what it did. I am thankful that the main guy who is being so damn negative is on my ignore list. The only thing that sucks is when people quote him I have to read his nonsense.

Jeff does a great job and personally I enjoy what he adds to the show. I can say without doubt his story on his first visit to the Paracast was the best single show since the show started. I've listened to every single show and I think that.

 

[cottonzway]

One thing I would like to add as a suggestion to these forums is the addition of a sub forum for weekly show discussion. I think this would be a great addition to the Paracast forums. Anyone agree/disagree?

 

[hopeful skeptic]

Wow, I didn't expect this to turn into what it did. I am thankful that the main guy who is being so damn negative is on my ignore list. The only thing that sucks is when people quote him I have to read his nonsense.

As my Dad used to say, "Preaching to the choir is always an easy ride."

 

[CapnG]

Wow... what a mess this thread turned into...

Oh and Nature is overrated. Trees and rocks and mud. Oh look, a bug and some dog crap. Whoopie.

 

[interestedINitall]

Ah, I see cottonzway is one of those people for whom you have to qualify each and every "negative" statement. He lost his mind when I asked him "What happens now?" regarding the 9/11 conspiracies with which he seems to be obsessed. He accused me, via private message of course, of being part of a disinformation campaign. It would all be very funny if it weren't so damn sad.

I just love some of the conversational posturing that goes on. If you ask questions that don't have easy answers or don't just simply marvel at this or that then you're "negative" or "closed minded." I seldom see the people who ask the difficult questions resorting to the same posturing and calling the rabid believers "gullible" or "weak minded" - and they certainly could on more than a few occasions.

If being "negative" means that one asks questions that ruin all the fun for the "choir" then I guess I'm just a big old "negative" party-pooper.

Party on.

 

[miner]

I've had some UFO/Paranormal experiences within the last year. Prior to these experiences I never dreamed of any connection. In my mind, it seemed ridiculous to even consider linking the two.

For what its worth, I no longer feel this way. I believe there most likely is a connection.

I can't offer any proof or don't feel comfortable relating any of my stories. I do think Jeff, David and the inter-dimensional camp are closer to the truth than the nuts and bolt guys.

Keep an open mind. This is far more complex than what it appears, or should I say, it's possibly been made to appear.

Cut Jeff and David some slack. They're after the same answers we all are.

 

[hopeful skeptic]

Boy, the silence is deafening. Amusing, but not surprising. Maybe if I tap my fingers on the table a little louder?

 

[CapnG]

I dunno what you're expecting, Skeptic. Join us over here on the "negative" porch. I'll bring chips.

Meanwhile to keep the fire going, here's one of my favorite nerdy negative quotes:

"An open mind is like a fortress; it's gates unbarred, it's walls unguarded."

 

[Rick Deckard]

I've had some UFO/Paranormal experiences within the last year. Prior to these experiences I never dreamed of any connection. In my mind, it seemed ridiculous to even consider linking the two.

For what its worth, I no longer feel this way. I believe there most likely is a connection.

I can't offer any proof or don't feel comfortable relating any of my stories. I do think Jeff, David and the inter-dimensional camp are closer to the truth than the nuts and bolt guys.

I'd keep your experiences to yourself if I were you - the folks on here don't want to hear it. They'll say your either a con artist or deluded. Find a private forum and share your thoughts with people who've had similar experiences. You won't get any answers on here - only name-calling and ridicule.