• 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!

Nancy Talbott, Robbert van den Broeke, April 29, 2012

Hi there,
I recently listened to the two shows with Nancy Talbot. I found the first show very interesting as the people that Nancy said found some real anomalies in her samples seem to be much credited in their professional fields (but as for the Imbrogno's case that should be taken with caution)

I think it was a good idea to bring RVDB and his friend Stan for another show. As for Stan being a mentalist and well versed in computers (as others on the forum pointed out), I personnally think that what Nancy, RVDB and Stan claim is so incredible, that RVDB and Stan are frauds and that Nancy, too committed in to stand back, has been fooled.

Another thing that is illogic in RVDB'story and makes me think that way is that he said his experiences have a family background. If that's the case, why then his parents wouldn't believe his experiences when he was a child and place him in a mental institute? They sure wouldn't do this if they had similar experiences and knew their son was not crazy.

I don't think this by itself should necesseraly impact on Nancy's BLT and crop-circles research...It's too bad for fer that she believes so strongly in RVDB and Stan's claims that she can't think of the possibility that they are frauds.
 
207 posts and counting, we need to give this dude some kind of award. isuggest we club together and buy him this;
Amazon.com: Official Adobe Photoshop 2.0 (9780679790242): David Biedny, Bert Monroy: Books

LOL!! Good stuff, Nameless.
This is what people do to guys like this, these days. In the old days (like with the previous episode) we would have grouped van den Broeke in with the Mystic Barber but we simply have no tolerance for guys like this...guys who cannot or are unable, to validate their claims.

Maybe it's better that Whitney Streiber doesn't come on the Paracast. He'd not be able to answer the 'hard questions'. Maybe that means something, huh?
 
Hi there,
I recently listened to the two shows with Nancy Talbot. I found the first show very interesting as the people that Nancy said found some real anomalies in her samples seem to be much credited in their professional fields (but as for the Imbrogno's case that should be taken with caution)

I think it was a good idea to bring RVDB and his friend Stan for another show. As for Stan being a mentalist and well versed in computers (as others on the forum pointed out), I personnally think that what Nancy, RVDB and Stan claim is so incredible, that RVDB and Stan are frauds and that Nancy, too committed in to stand back, has been fooled.

Another thing that is illogic in RVDB'story and makes me think that way is that he said his experiences have a family background. If that's the case, why then his parents wouldn't believe his experiences when he was a child and place him in a mental institute? They sure wouldn't do this if they had similar experiences and knew their son was not crazy.

I don't think this by itself should necesseraly impact on Nancy's BLT and crop-circles research...It's too bad for fer that she believes so strongly in RVDB and Stan's claims that she can't think of the possibility that they are frauds.

It's interesting to contrast the first show with Nancy Talbot with the second. When she was discussing her crop circle research, she seemed rational. When it came to RVDB, she seemed to lose any ability to think critically. Two things appear obvious to me after listening to the second show carefully again. One, Nancy experienced some events with RVDB that "blew her mind", and two, she's been charmed by RVDB and is, in a sense, blinded by "love". I believe she is an honest person, just as I believe that Robert is a charlatan and a sociopath. Nancy appears to be a person who is naive about how easy it is to trick the human mind and create incredible illusions. I remember one time at a friends' wedding reception I performed a few simple mentalist tricks. Most at the table were entertained and somewhat shocked, but accepted that it was some kind of psychological manipulation. One guy at the table, however, followed me around for the rest of the night, convinced that I could read minds -- it almost seemed like he was ready to form a cult around me. It took a long time for me to convince him that I had no such abilities, and I felt like he was never quite convinced. I remember in college, I went to a show by the amazing Kreskin -- he hypnotized one of my friends and told him that he would not be able to see one of his assistants, and then had that assistant carry a chair around the stage. Nothing I said after the show could convince my friend that Kreskin didn't have powers of telekinesis.
 
It's interesting to contrast the first show with Nancy Talbot with the second. When she was discussing her crop circle research, she seemed rational. When it came to RVDB, she seemed to lose any ability to think critically. Two things appear obvious to me after listening to the second show carefully again. One, Nancy experienced some events with RVDB that "blew her mind", and two, she's been charmed by RVDB and is, in a sense, blinded by "love". I believe she is an honest person, just as I believe that Robert is a charlatan and a sociopath. Nancy appears to be a person who is naive about how easy it is to trick the human mind and create incredible illusions.

that's also my opinion. I think it's very difficult for her to even consider the possibility that she has been fooled since she has seemingly establised a friendly relationship with RVDB.

I remember one time at a friends' wedding reception I performed a few simple mentalist tricks. Most at the table were entertained and somewhat shocked, but accepted that it was some kind of psychological manipulation. One guy at the table, however, followed me around for the rest of the night, convinced that I could read minds -- it almost seemed like he was ready to form a cult around me. It took a long time for me to convince him that I had no such abilities, and I felt like he was never quite convinced. I remember in college, I went to a show by the amazing Kreskin -- he hypnotized one of my friends and told him that he would not be able to see one of his assistants, and then had that assistant carry a chair around the stage. Nothing I said after the show could convince my friend that Kreskin didn't have powers of telekinesis.

About things that "blew Nancy's mind" I remind that she said in the show with RVDB that at one time RVDB was given a camera and a new memory card. I don't recall if RVDB put he memory card himself in the camera, if that was the case someone good at tricks good easily subsitute this one for another (or maybe even do something else?) to make those photos.
 
It's interesting to contrast the first show with Nancy Talbot with the second. When she was discussing her crop circle research, she seemed rational. When it came to RVDB, she seemed to lose any ability to think critically. Two things appear obvious to me after listening to the second show carefully again. One, Nancy experienced some events with RVDB that "blew her mind", and two, she's been charmed by RVDB and is, in a sense, blinded by "love". I believe she is an honest person, just as I believe that Robert is a charlatan and a sociopath. Nancy appears to be a person who is naive about how easy it is to trick the human mind and create incredible illusions. I remember one time at a friends' wedding reception I performed a few simple mentalist tricks. Most at the table were entertained and somewhat shocked, but accepted that it was some kind of psychological manipulation. One guy at the table, however, followed me around for the rest of the night, convinced that I could read minds -- it almost seemed like he was ready to form a cult around me. It took a long time for me to convince him that I had no such abilities, and I felt like he was never quite convinced. I remember in college, I went to a show by the amazing Kreskin -- he hypnotized one of my friends and told him that he would not be able to see one of his assistants, and then had that assistant carry a chair around the stage. Nothing I said after the show could convince my friend that Kreskin didn't have powers of telekinesis.

again thanks to the Rob and Nancy show we get a cool post from this new guy. maybe theres something good to this after all!
I suggest everyone watches as much Derren Brown on youtube as possible to see exactly what you can do as a "mentalist/magician/psychologist".:



 
Derren has been making a name for himself here in the UK over the last few years as an extremely talented mentalist.
Derren's imagination has been given free reign by some very forward-thinking producers and I say that he has taken the showmanship of mentalism to new heights. One fantastic example is when he has a young man hypnotised and then has him playing an arcade video game. During the game, in which he is battling zombies with a gun, Derren made him sleep at the game, then removed him to a set in which he was 'woken' and led to believe he was 'inside the zombie game'.
For all intents and purposes, the guy thought he was just playing an extremely realistic game - he thought he was still playing the game when in fact he was shooting at actors dressed as zombies.
At the end, Derren made him sleep again, then woke him once more standing at the arcade game. When the game finished, the punter thought he'd been standing there playing the game the whole time, convinced he had just played the most realistic video game possible. He did exactly that but not in the way he thought!

It was an utterly fascinating episode and Derren constantly comes up with the goods. One thing he excels at too, is allowing his guests to go through a process of learning some mentalist skill that they then have to put into practice, thereby proving that these abilities can be learned by most people and there is nothing paranormal about them, however much it seems so.

I genuinely have never known another performer as talented and as versatile and imaginative as Derren. Pretty much you can pick any Derren Brown at random and be sure of great entertainment. If you haven't been exposed to the guy before, now's the time to start. He really is that good.
 
Derren and modern mind magicians really show what the mind is capable of and how it can be deceived and can deceive. Seriously guys if you want a base reading (pardon the pun) as to what a rational standard of mind capabilities are in regards to psychics, evp, alien abductions etc... watch everything you can that these guys do. Then it really isnt so far fetched when you hear off brainwashed assasins and government false alien abduction scenarios.

Brown's eriksonian handshake induction technique is pretty spot on, anyone who has ever tried it knows its hard to practice and get right. His pattern interupt is pretty cool too and the subliminal forced choices and new techniques which he has inovated in this regard are pretty cool too (check out the rooted to the spot experiment).
 
Brown a mentalist? Myabe, maybe not. Illusionist. Yes. Disillusionist? Absolutely. Nicely wraps interesting acts and results with complete disillusions, fakery and stunting.

Good entertainment but as paranormal as a snneze.
 
So to add to the endless confusion, some character posted a review of The Paracast over at iTunes suggesting I asked too many questions, that I should have just let Talbott and van den Broeke filibuster and let the listeners decide. Of course, they've already done that elsewhere; it was time we held their feet to the fire.
 
a mentalist is from "mentalism" its a form of trickery that uses a combination of psychology, nlp, suggestion, hypnotism, showmanship and slight of hand. he makes a point of claiming that there what he does is not paranormal. as in the fucking video.
Brown a mentalist? Myabe, maybe not. Illusionist. Yes. Disillusionist? Absolutely. Nicely wraps interesting acts and results with complete disillusions, fakery and stunting.

Good entertainment but as paranormal as a snneze.
so put the 40 ounce down and ffs get with the programme grandma your not making sense dammit!
 
S
a mentalist is from "mentalism" its a form of trickery that uses a combination of psychology, nlp, suggestion, hypnotism, showmanship and slight of hand. he makes a point of claiming that there what he does is not paranormal. as in the fucking video.

so put the 40 ounce down and ffs get with the the programme grandad your not making sense dammit!

Sure. Derren Brown is a fucking, proven fraud. Understand, kiddie?
 
So to add to the endless confusion, some character posted a review of The Paracast over at iTunes suggesting I asked too many questions, that I should have just let Talbott and van den Broeke filibuster and let the listeners decide. Of course, they've already done that elsewhere; it was time we held their feet to the fire.


I'm surprised that they have the Paracast categorized under news and politics. That one “character” is probably the “worker” bee.
 
Brown a mentalist? Myabe, maybe not. Illusionist. Yes. Disillusionist? Absolutely. Nicely wraps interesting acts and results with complete disillusions, fakery and stunting.

Good entertainment but as paranormal as a snneze.

You might be splitting hairs don't you think? Of course there isn't anything paranormal about it, I think he makes that pretty clear. It apparently isn't required.
 
Back
Top