• 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
DFWMike said:
. I don't think it's wise to try to dramatize the situation by reading specs of a camera and basically a low level calling out of an 86 year old lady.
Click to expand...

To be fair i had made a comment about single frame exposure in the other thread capturing the light about 3 hours earlier.
id have been surprised if someone hadnt looked into the posibility and posted their findings.

im not an expert, thats why i come here. i want an experts view on my ideas.
its the mechanics of the research thats done here that gives me confidence in the answers i get.

its a pity because i would like to see that mechanism brought to bear on this matter, and i think the hosts bent over backwards in the initial approach to be open to the subject.
but if the gentlemen interviewed didnt read these forums and know full well thats how things are done here, then the "mix up" is theirs.

this shows endorsment of the events depicted in the DVD would guarantee i would by the books and dvd's

but my first reaction to everyone saying "you just cant do that" was i bet you could if you could single frame over expose. i think thats a valid question and frankly its no surprise some models can do it.
my first thought was some manual jiggery pokery with the camera, jamming the drive and shutter open somehow.
if there are cameras of that type that can do that as a feature, then i want to know that as part of my assesment of the cases merits.

its just good science, Ms Izatt uses a camera for the same reason .it made sense to her to do so because its good science its 30 000 feet of "proof".....

if the producers are serious about the claim its 30 000 feet of (scientific) proof, then this show and its methods should complement the research, not be at odds with it
 
jritzmann said:
and I've expressed to Frank Longo that I'll do whatever it takes to make communication comfortable for Ms. Dorothy if she'd speak with me. Thats where it stands for me, and it's about all I can do.

~Jeff
Click to expand...

I really hope that you get to speak with her, Jeff. I still hope David does too.
 
Peter Gutilla sounded like a complete jerk. This case is trash. "Angels"? No. "Light Beings"? Even worse. When people start making up new terms to describe old concepts, you know you're on the bullshit train.

When you have thousands of feet of film of alien beings sitting down at your dinner table for tea, let me know.
 
Well, it's really late, and I just hung up from a long conversation with Frank Longo...I'm exhausted and so I'll keep it short.

Frank is going to essentially introduce me to Ms. Dorothy - he's going to forward a letter directly to her that I'll be writing tomorrow. After that, he's stepping aside and if she'd like to respond to me, or call me, it's totally her call. He doesn't want to be a "gatekeeper" in any sense, nor limit or edit my communication with her. He's left things very open to let Ms. Dorothy make the call of whether or not she wants to speak with me (written or phone).

I also told him, that as far as going there to meet with her or spend any time at the location might be entirely too much for me to handle. You all know my fear in regards to that issue. I don't think I'd get any sleep, and it'd be a hell of a drive. I'm happy at this point to be able to communicate with her at all, and essentially be introduced by someone she trusts. Thats a good thing. Maybe more will come out of it, maybe nothing...but I'm willing to extend communication with Ms. Dorothy and let her decide.

I don't know if whats going on with her is in any way connected to stuff I've seen and experienced...I just get the feeling there is. Thats all I'm going off of right now. I find her case (what I have seen so far) highly compelling and interesting. I'm really intrigued by the subtleness of the whole thing. Things said in her film ring oddly familiar (and I want to find out why), and I have to say I'm more interested in her perspective on certain angles then the films (although they're really interesting too).

My outlook, if I should be able to speak with her is not to work on her case, and I'm not out to prove or disprove anything. This wont be me in an investigator capacity this go round. I guess I find myself in a unique position after 20+ years, that something piques my interest besides the normal evidence and doing the whole analysis dance. This is a personal kind of viewpoint for me I guess...I honestly don't know what I hope to find, maybe insight of some sort...or maybe just her perspective on the enigma. Maybe I wont get anything out of it, but I don't know till I ask. And I feel compelled to ask...so I'm goin' with it.

Nite,
~J
 
Rob said:
How many hours does 30,000 feet of Super 8 film make?
Click to expand...

Some rough calculations from incomplete data:

There is 50 ft of film per Super8 cartridge. 30,000ft of film would be 600 individual cartridges, each running 3 minutes 20 seconds at 18fps for 3600 frames per cartridge. 600 cartridges would be 33.3 hours The Unsolved Mysteries segment stated that Izatt had made 3,000 individual frame enlargements from her films. Presumably these are frames of interest. 600x3600=2,160,000 individual frames. Frames of interest comprise 0.138% of the total footage shot.

Did I do that right?
 
Good luck, Jeff. Hope it leads to some good evidence for everyone, but maybe some answers for you especially.

--Shawn
 
Will-
You've hit essentially on the head. But it's more then that.

I had a very long conversation with Jeremy the other night and I told him that since watching Dorothy's film, and hearing on particular issue she had (with regard to the nature of the experience and her own mindset) I've had my own little epiphany about my own views.

I have previously stated my conviction, that this experience is "toxic", and I've even used the word "demonic" (whatever the hell that means). However Dorothy seemed to indicate that the experiences were not scary, until she feared or suspected it as negative. Then thats what she got.

So, that being said, what if I'm the toxic one. Not "them". I'm, a lot of the time, an angry, stressed out dude. Work, the world, raising a kid, dealing with finances...I mean these are issues everyone has to deal with...but I tend to commiserate over them. I let them effect me, and I just get angry, fearful and self defeated. Thats no way to be, and I haven't always been like that. I work my problems out, but not til I've bitched and pissed my head off.

In the end, it always works out. So what the point of the pissing. There isn't one.

I've said many times, "this world has made me pissed off all the time".

No, I have allowed it to.

So, in essence, I'm working on changing my mindset. Being positive, and dealing with life's issues in a better way. I have an extremely high pressure job, at times with nearly physically impossible demands for media and commercial art/design. But I always deliver on-time. I don't fail. Ever.

I don't because in some fashion I reach a point of critical mass, and let the stress drop away...and I work with accuracy and speed.

Thats the application I have to apply to life in general. With me so far?

So, apply that, and I'd adjust my attitude. Adjust my attitude, and perhaps the experience will reflect that, a more positive face.

Well that'd be good right? Yeah, still a bit scary, but if I get my mindset straight and become positive...I think I can deal...or at least set limits and see if the enigma abides.

For that reason alone, I've begun to take those deep breaths and get clarity. If I was the toxic one, then I don't wanna be. What would the experience be if the toxicity was gone.

Thats what I'm seriously contemplating in finding out. When I'm ready. As I told Frank Longo the other night, I cannot believe the way I've perceived and communicated this experience over the years, that I'm even considering the aspect of trying to re initiate any interaction with it.

But I am. Very seriously considering. And, as if the enigma knows, it's been presenting old aspects again recently-bright flashes outside from nowhere, a feeling of proximity, and 2 sightings in 2 days of VERY odd aerial phenomena. It's almost as if they are watching and waiting, but I don't know that for sure. Things are though, ramping up again. Not surprising, as I've jumped into this thing in the past few weeks really hard.

So, if I can get some insight from Dorothy, it'd be great. I think she has a lot of it to share.

But the idea of putting myself into a situation with "them" right now? Forget it. I don't think I could deal with it. Not yet. The idea that I'm contemplating getting involved with it again is enough for me to swallow at this point.

But, as I said to Jeremy, I'd much rather be in a positive situation with this then a fearful one. If this actually works, and the experience changes per my on perception of it...then I believe that tells us something valuable.

It's the first step I worry a bit about. ;)
 
That would seem to point to it being mental or demonic to me, which is the big question I want answered myself.

Laugh if you want, but I have an open mind to wonder if this all still could be demons messing with humans as the Bible said they would.
 
mike said:
its been said that what many describe as "make-believe"

is in fact believe-make
Click to expand...


Yup, and quantum physics is talking more and more about the perception directly effecting the "reality".

Miah-I don't think mental, nor internal. That is, unless we're capable of generating phenomena that others can witness too. But, I have never gotten the sense of this being an internal thing. However, I have to mention that it seems to me that the enigma needs us to manifest. So, there's a part that we're playing too...thats how I look at it anyway. For right now at least.
 
in her fictional works Julian May coined some nice terminolgy

one being the Psycho Creative Meta Function.

another fancy way of saying "believe-make"
 
It doesn't necessarily point to the demonic or the mental. One thing that seems to me certain is that whatever they are, they make us do work. This is not about landing and shaking hands and giving us free energy devices to solve our oil problem. No, they are confrontational in ways that aren't just a challenge to logic. They aren't giving us mere word games and equations to solve. It's not confrontation on our terms, like a video game or the Da Vinci Code or something, where we have a chance to think through the riddle and solve this, because at the core of us, we are not thought. We are more than that, more than rational capacity and that's the part they speak to and that's the part that's confusing.

If true, if you'll allow me that, then there's no way in hell any being who is not stuck where we're stuck, blind where we're blind, is going to even be able to openly communicate with us in a way that is coherent to us. We'll only be able to decode the message with the tools we have and so we'll only be able to see things in terms of "rational" and "irrational." Nuts-and-bolts and dream-like.

Now what is the closest association we have to beings like that? Demons. Maybe fairies, but definitely demons. Right? They're chaotic, confusing, confrontational, challenging--oh a whole bunch of C words. But when we say "demons" we mean beings that are those things to an end. The end is evil--making us fearful, killing us, stealing our souls--whatever evil means to you.

So along come beings who appear to us this way. It's incredibly easy (and lazy) to make the leap that their end is evil because they certainly seem to operate according to that archetype.

One thing I know about all of us is that we don't know if that archetype is real or a projection. And if it is real, we don't know what purpose "evil" serves. I mean even if evil is real we still do not know what it means, just that it is and it promotes a fear response in us.

So we've got two, until now, unacknowledged problems: 1.) IF evil is real, we don't know if/why it's bad, just the feeling that it is. 2.) IF there are beings who approach us who are not evil, but are of a type of unified consciousness that is foreign to our divided minds, then we will think them demonic because that's how the communication filters through.

Sometimes a duck isn't a duck.

I would further add that juuuuust maybe it is not coincidence beings who appear this way look like demons to us. It's not a coincidence if a sentient species such as ours has a destiny (should we choose to acknowledge it), which is to give up the divided mind for lent. Giving up the divided mind is essentially suicide without bodily death. So the very thing that we should be, the very next leap in evolution--if it was staring us in the face in the form of an alien race who has gone through this--would look antithetical to what we are. They are one; we are many. The many = chaos, confusion, the demon.

So who is the demon again?

I'm gonna say that this is the case and so it doesn't matter if these beings MEAN TO point this out to us, mean to wake us up to this fact or not. Their very presence is a reminder of what we're not and so the mirror reflects the same image of us regardless of their intent. But I'm willing to bet they must know this and so they do meant to point it out.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: It is a completely useless question "What are they." That gets fleshed out as soon as we find out what we are. That's the question. The rest is fear, New Age "love" and masturbation.

I hope that makes sense.
 
several of you have made the same point, that being no matter what, we need to deal with them within our own reference to reality.
i think thats the holy grail here, is a way to interface with the reality, in a way that matches our way of referencing reality as we understand it

a keeper at a zoo can happily walk into one enclosure and interact with one species, but need to dart gun another before daring to set foot inside its domain. fear and the reaction it provokes seems to be overiding feature in this picture
 
Jeff, you may be onto something.

The Secret and What the Bleep are a bit cheesy, but I think there is a core of truth in this whole quantum mysticism thing. I think our attitudes can affect what we observe in a very real way, collapsing the wave function, so to speak.

In another time, you probably would have been a shaman, and your interraction with the paranormal world would have had a structure to it that would allow you to make constructive use of what you learn. We don't have those belief structures in this day and age, instead we have paranoia and distrust and fear, so we are cast adrift on mystic waters, and we fare badly.

This isn't about me, but I will say I've seen spiritual entities (ghosts, other) all my life, from the time I was a small child. I didn't learn to associate them with fear, so I've encountered a lifetime of quiet tricksters, playful entities, and mostly curious entities that are lonely. I simply can't imagine the hell my life would have been if these were all percieved as frightful, dangerous beings. (Note: I have encountered two dangerous entities, but these are the exceptions.)

Sorry for being so long winded, but I think you are onto to something. My encounters have been light-weight compared to yours, I think, so I hope this brings you peace.
 
ArizonaWill said:
Jeremy, you assert always that the aliens are ONE. You assert this as fact. Why? I have yet to read any other abductee say that. And what does that mean, a hive consciousness? A sense of all for one, one for all (3 Muskateer bars?). Honestly, I think your basic tenet about the aliens is not proven, just your viewpoint.
Click to expand...


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
 
Will, I think you know that I wasn't claiming that the Secret as presented was literally true. Nor am I about to claim that everyone killed by the big tsunami was being negative, and abused children brought the abuse on themselves by being negative, etc. I was around in the 70's too, and I remember all that "every man is a god" stuff,too.

My point is that we have a role in what we experience, as shown by quantum physics, that the observer (or more probably his consciousnous) has a role in how a wave function collapses and the form it takes. It's subtle, and it doesn't mean crazy people create crazy worlds. We live in a consensus reality, and if a big wave wipes us out it doesn't matter if we are happy or sad.

One argument is that we exist in a world of lowest common denominators because wave interference wipes out the person full of wonder with an ocean of low expectations. We get the white noise version of reality.

Or, maybe that's all crap. I don't think it is, but I'm willing to entertain the idea.

Consider saints and great religious figures. They enterfaced with the paranormal down through time, and most of their experiences were positive and reinforced their belief systems and faith. If they had been toxic people, would the story have gone much differently? I suspect yes.

As I said before, in another cultural setting, the experiencer and perhaps even abductee of today would have been a respected shaman and dispenser of wisdom. These folk knew how to interract with the paranormal, put names to the spiritual enemies and allies, and gain useful information therefrom.

That's what I meant.
 
i think nuts and bolts are the key

the greater our own understanding and technological advancement, the closer we come to a compatible interface, a framework of reference that fits neatly
 
Back
Top