• 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!

March 2nd Show - Dorothy Izatt

Forums New posts
yeah, that peter dude seems 'controlling' of this case, which I think is common in these circles and I can't entirely blame people. If I spent 10 years of my life learning about something that no else wanted to know about and then it starts getting some interest, I can understand his actions, but that doesn't mean it's good for credibility and that him preaching his own conclusions as gospel on a high horse are going to help her case.

I personally think she is probably a legit paranormal experiencer and I base this not on the movie, which seems like it doesn't prove much to the average person.

I base this on the fact that her footage throws image experts for a loop, which is more important than throwing ATS postings for a loop. Furthermore, her case has been reviewed by Hynek and others, Jeff Rittzzman gives her the thumbs up and at no points has she really gone out of her way during the course of her life to get any publicity and in fact her family thinks she's nuts.

So before you dismiss this based on crumudgeon Peter and the seemingly subtle video evidence, keep in mind there are corroborating witnesses, experts who have said her case is legit, Rittzman's familiarity with aspects of her story as well as dreamworks level image experts agreeing that indeed her film is really hard to fake.

All of this indicates 100% in my mind, that there is something going there regardless of the marketing presentation that is put forth by Peter and the filmaker.

I've written this a bunch, but in Peter's book (and of course we can be weary of what he writes), it is indicated that there is a lot more film and I believe Dorothy is quoted as saying this, certainly the filmaker indicated this during the interview, and this other film is said to have much more detailed video proof.

So even if I was doubtfull, I might wait to see if this other video evidence ever goes public before slamming the gavel.

As for her ATS interview being underwhelming, I can't say I listened to it, but I also remember trying to have a coherent conversation with my late 85 year old grandmother and lets just say even at the age of 10, the conversation was less than podcast worthy :)

Of course this is all just my opinion and I haven't watched the video, although I did watch the trailers which came off to me a bit hokey and of course geared towards a certain reaction, but since I haven't ever put my own UFO movie together, I don't know if that is completely avoidable.
 
banning said:
This is really sad :( i've fallen behind on the show and was catching up and listened to the Dorothy Izatt episode. I finished it and was really excited go 'ol DB was gonna get down on some amazing sh*t. But yeah, I ran across this forum and its unfortunate... :( I usually dont join discussions but yeah i just really was let down on this one. Anyway yeah, keep up the good work Gene & David... you 2 give hope to people that really are after truth and not just amazing stories.
Click to expand...
I was catching up too and after I heard it for the 1st time I had to sign up here on the forums to see what's up. Now I don't know. As good old Fox Mulder I think said several times "I want to believe" and so do I. :) Dorothy, from my point of view as of right now, is having a legitimate experience but wether or not the film represents that I'm keeping that in my "gray basket" too. Even though it's really not "research" I call it GR or google research and just see what happens. ;) I did run across some forum posts by a member that goes by the username 'ufoscan' which has a few points that I don't agree on but are interesting:
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.co...howtopic=119211&st=60&p=2176979&#entry2176979
I'd like to see the CBC's footage and what the Canadian "On The Road Again" show actually came up with also after reading what ufoscan had posted there.
I think Jeff is doing the best he can to get his foot in the door and then go from there.
 
you know what would be REALLY HOT... if gene and db could get dorothy on the show ;) hell id be willing to pay money to hear that one... haha not that i wouldnt be willing to pay any other time but id be willing to pay a pay-per-view cost for that haha...
 
As far as faulty cameras and such I had 3 old Super 8mm back in the day and had good and bad results with all of them. I even had a defective cartridge that threw off a little 2 reel short film I was working on and the 2nd reel was totally out of focus even though I manually focused every scene and had incorporated a cheesy but effective method to keep every new shot in focus. I had a few friends that were doing Super 8 short films and one of them read Super 8 filmmaker but I picked up a few copies of Cinemagic Magazine since they covered special effects, published by Starlog at the time. I do recall a few Super 8mm film rewinders and one is referenced here about 1/2 way down the page: http://super8wiki.com/index.php/Category:FAQ They reference the ewa S8B but I seem to remember desiring the Craven Super-8 Backwinder. I'd look up the magazine but that may take days. ;) Those devices were limited but would allow double exposures and in camera mattes but I seriously doubt Dorothy had one of these.
BTW I loved Cinemagic Magazine and I've always wanted to do spfx of some sort back then but I was on a broken shoestring budget back in them dayz. :D With the hindsight of 20/20 or thereabouts I should've had da jewels to make a stab at risking what little I had and went to the west coast and tried to get in somewhere at a studio like ILM as a janitor or whatever. LOL :D Now with HD video, Macs and PCs making spfx is not a heavy money issue like I had when I was a youngster, now it's time, desire and what do we do? :)
BTW I'm not trying to debunk Dorothy I'm just providing some information to those that may not be aware of those devices or simply because they're too young to know. ;)
 
What a disappointing end to this whole thing... I just listened to the episode myself and was incredibly excited to hear the results of Jeff and David's investigation.

So here we are over a month since the final post in the thread - what has happened? Jeff did you get a chance to converse with Dorothy?
 
GSB said:
So here we are over a month since the final post in the thread - what has happened? Jeff did you get a chance to converse with Dorothy?
Click to expand...

I had quite a bit of correspondence with Frank Longo, the director of the film. I composed a letter and sent it to Frank who forwarded it to Dorothy. I have not yet heard anything back other then the daughter who handles Ms. Izatt's email is busy with life issues, and Frank has no idea when I'll ever hear back, if ever. It's been months since the initial letter and no reply whatsoever. I get the distinct feeling no one wants to talk with me on that end.
 
Wow.

Such a shame. I havent seen the dvd yet but all impressions seem to indicate that its highly compelling. So disappointing.
 
I got hold of the DVD this week. It's good but very frustrating. The most compelling footage wasn't even shot by Dorothy but the documentary film crew when interviewing Dorothy's daughter. What's the point in banging on about 30,000 feet of film and showing just a few minutes of it?

Going back to the Paracast episode, I remember the filmmaker saying he didn't want to overwhelm the viewer with too much footage or something like that. What a load of shite, and obviously a ploy to have people buy a 2nd and 3rd DVD.

All that aside, Dorothy seems genuine and the footage shown is interesting, though for the most part possibly more paranormal than typical UFO type subject matter.

More footage please, f**kwit.

Matt
 
IT seems to me that we will never get some type of disclosure on ufos from our Goverments in our lifetime. :frown: However if we cant get around or through the governments secrecy , we should throw all our efforts into contactees those i am referring to are those haveing regular contact with beings or whatever this type of phenomen is. IF This phenomen is real this is where we should go i believe. Dorothy Izzat if she is still in contact with some phenomen requires all good ufologists and researchers to turn there attention to her, plus others based around the world this could be our holy grail not military or intelligence informers:eek:
 
I managed to get a copy of this show this week. If anyone wants it let me know. I have a 250mb file that I could easily upload to anyone. Decent quality too.

As for the video itself. I think the fact that they didnt reply to Jeff speaks volume.
 
mike said:
ive heard the "hive mind" theory from a number of sources including streiber

and looking at terrestrial examples the hive minds tend to be "builders" ie bees and ants. to me its not inconceivable that a space faring civilisation might evolve from such a society given the right circumstances.
i also think that if you were "building" a bio form for a specific purpose a hive mind would be useful in certain situations/applications

if i were building bio forms specifically to go forth and cataloge, then a psychic shared database makes sense. information gleaned by one node becomes accessable to all, much more efficient than email
Click to expand...

Great point and I think that is why it is possible that the visitors, if they are real, may believe contacting one of us SHOULD have the same effect as contacting all of us. Maybe they don't understand the lack of connected minds.
 
Hi all, sorry about putting an old topic back to life, relatively new listener of the paracast here. Most the shows ive heard so far have been good, and with interesting guests and discussions. And ive picked up on what the "paracast treatment" is all about, which is fine with me. However, i didnt hear that treatment really applied to these 2 guys here. Or maybe this was one of those cases that actually made you realize the importance of scrutinizing your guest's stories more, cause i was really expecting some hardcore questions from you guys on this.

I myself saw the documentary and i was very far from impressed...i cant say that i understand what would drive people to make such an elabrate scam as this, but thats nevertheless what i think it is. As many have mentioned, its not only the fact that there is hardly any controversial footage in the docu, it even recycles some older ufo clips that have been around the net for ages. Amazing that noone picked up on that? Im talking particularly about that clip which is taken of the "ships" "powering up". James Gilliland uses the same clip in his documentary, and it sounds like him in hte background.

I realize that i dont have the background to say wether the images are faked in this or that way, but the overall documentary just really stinks...to the point where i was wondering wether it was something similar to "dark side of the moon", where it would become more and more absurd and in the end it would be revealed. But yeah, as we all know it isnt. And i actually was thinking a bit the same with this paracast inerview, that y0u would start frying gutilla and longo towards the end...and when you didnt,i was kinda surprised. And then i thought you were actually just holding back, just to gain more ammo to expose these guys.

Again, its old hat now all of this...just wanted to give a comment on it and maybe get some reaction to peoples thoughts now, if any. Anyways, I'll continue listening in hte back archives and future shows. Over and out
 
I'm catching up on back episodes, since I'm a fairly new listener to the show and I heard this episode. Usually I don't do a forum search after hearing episodes but I was compelled to this time.

I found the topic of Dorothy Izatt very compelling yet I was put off by her handlers. That's all I'll say about that.

I was very intrigued by the prospect of David and Jeff meeting with, or at least speaking to Dorothy. Yet as we find out, that won't be occurring.

It's more of the same in this field where believers are believers and skeptics and debunkers are classified as the same entity. Very sad indeed.

If the truth is out there, why is there a need to protect it? Why is there a need to profit from it? Isn't knowledge supposed to be free?
 
Back
Top