• 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!

Nov 30th show:Don't slit your wrists David!

Forums New posts
Wow-I can't believe that woman! First off, I don't see how she could consider the interview rude-it wasn't. I don't understand these people-who gives her the authority to help the living & dead? Seems to me she is just cashing in on her father's fame.

It dissapoints me so much that people are just so into buying their own crap that any hint of someone bursting their world view bubble sends them into insults.

I'm sad to say this but I wonder if there is anyone in the "ghost world" has any kind of head on their shoulders.
 
Bixyboo said:
Hey: Not to derail, but David mentioned he took Catholic Communion at a Mass, as a Jew. I'm really surprised they GAVE it to him in the first place! Or whoever he was with didn't stop him, etc...

NOT that I believe in any of this (now)..but as a former Catholic (converted at age 19)....unless you were taking your First Communion as a Catholic and/or converting to Catholicism, you should'nt have been given/allowed to take Communion....:)

ie: Now, I 'shouldn't' take Communion, either...if I were to ever attend a Mass again....due to being divorced-without-having-gotten/done-an-annulment (which I could STILL do, despite the fact that I had two children with my first husband...who was not Catholic....and now having been remarried for years now, go figure!). THEN, I could take Communion again....WhatEVER....:rolleyes:

None of that matters to me, just pointing it out, why, I know not! lol. *shrug*
Click to expand...

This is obviously a tricky issue, since from the point of view of anyone who doesn't believe in a particular religion its beliefs are irrelevant, but for the believers they have reality and matter big time (although the application of some of the fine details is certainly arguable). It's made even more complicated by the fact that some of the beliefs that distinguish Christianity from Judaism and Islam (critically the divinity of Christ, which then leads to the Communion issue in Catholicism and the Orthodox churches among others) are arguably blasphemous in terms of those religions. So there are obviously issues on which believers have to agree to disagree (well, it's better than slaughtering each other).
So anyway, back to the issue at hand: as ridiculous as the idea is to non-believers in that religion that a consecrated communion wafer can literally be the body of Christ, try to look at it from the point of view of those who do believe it: if you accept the idea for the sake of argument and consider its implications, it shouldn't take too much imagination to see why those who believe in its reality would consider a non-believer taking the host to be inappropriate - if you're talking about consuming the body of a divinity, it's not something to be done lightly or unknowingly.
I realise this sounds like a load of crap, but the point I'm trying to make is that when dealing with the beliefs of others, it doesn't make sense to expect them to react according to what you find reasonable or credible, because that's not what governs their reality.
To take a non-loaded example: there was a fad a few years ago for "Celebrities" to travel to exotic locations and have Buddhist weddings for the novelty value, despite having no particular understanding of or belief in Buddhism. I found that deeply disrespectful to Buddhists, because they were treating their beliefs as props and reducing their religion to a circus.

Here's a factoid you may find interesting: it has been claimed since the 17th century (possibly correctly) that the term "hocus-pocus" was invented during the Reformation in mockery of the Latin words of consecration Hoc est enim corpus meum ("For this is my body") - that's how thoroughly nasty (well, there was more actual killing involved on all sides, which was also pretty nasty) this issue has got in the past, and that's the kind of thing (still built into the English language like the n-word used to be) that we have to get past.

They key thing is to acknowledge the fact that we disagree about the fundamental nature of reality, and still manage to treat each other with respect. Actually that would be good practice for dealing with aliens...

PS. That said, that woman was an utter nutter. And really, really, really annoying.
 
When She was talking about that direct voice stuff, I was thinking that is it possible this was a sign of multiple personality disorder.... could this be true? Or is that not really within the scope of that particular disorder?
 
Gareth said:
When She was talking about that direct voice stuff, I was thinking that is it possible this was a sign of multiple personality disorder.... could this be true? Or is that not really within the scope of that particular disorder?
Click to expand...

More likely it's not within the scope of her particular belief structure. Other people may be mentally ill but not her friend, no! She talks to ghosts out loud!

You make some interesting points Kevin but the whole transubstantiation thing is just another bullshit invention of religion. Within the literal text of the Gospel Jesus decalres the bread his flesh and wine his blood and then declares "Do this in rememberance of me". In other words, it's strictly symbolic, purely ceremonial in NO WAY is it ever suggested or implied that the bread and wine magically transmute into the vital fluids and living flesh of the messiah. It's just silly, superstitious, medieval nonesense.
 
Maybe it's my far off dark sense of humour, but really I dont mind these imbeciles sprouting off.
To turn around and criticize the Paracast for the interview, well ---- um, if you didnt want to do it - YOU DIDNT HAVE TO.
She's just another idealist milking off someone else's notoriety as far as I am concerned.
I stop short of saying a "bullshit artist".

(I think the guys do an awesome job. The BS detector has been overloaded a bit of with some of the guests, but we dont give a toss about that!!)
 
Grokl said:
I stop short of saying a "bullshit artist".

(I think the guys do an awesome job. The BS detector has been overloaded a bit of with some of the guests, but we dont give a toss about that!!)
Click to expand...

Blimey, I'm just over half way through the interview, and I have no problem with it so far. She's obviously talking a load of crap, but it seems thats to be expected when it comes to people who 'ghost-hunt'.

Anyway, Gene and David seem ok. No nasty questions, just the usual intelligent thought provoking ones. So I have to ask that age old question ... are these people on the same planet as me??

Maybe they're autistic. Is it that they have no empathy with the (intelligent) interviewer ... or are they just stupid??? Ahhh yeah ... its the latter :D

p.s if some one is not quite bs-ing ... are they bull-farting?? :eek::D
 
I am sure that it could be some kind of mental disorder. I can't be totally sure but I think that multiple personality people's other personalities don't communicate with eachother. If that made sense. Coffee! I thought that the most interesting of the voices was the last one with the old lady but who knows if its for real or not.
 
I got in the first hour and only listened to a few minutes of the second when it became apparent that she was only repeating herself.

That said, I agree with her statement that the supernatural is only "super" in the respect that we humans don't understand all that is in Nature yet.

But the alarms went off in my short-circuited epileptic meat-puter when Gene ( or David? Sorry, short-term memory failure ) mentioned using scientific methodology in these ghost hunting investigations and the vague, stand-offish bullshite she was slinging back on why nobody does that because "that's not their thing."

It sure smelled like "the side-show" to me!

And as for getting abused, well toots, you should've investigated what you were getting into in the first place. Just because a site's hosts investigate the paranormal, don't assume you're preaching to the choir.

If you spout stuff like Silvia Brown or Derek Acorah, expect to be taken to task for it and suck it up!

Beware for what you ask for, you just might receive it!
 
Man...this is a tough audience. I didn't think it was THAT much of bomb. Better than your average C2C. At least 300% less retarded than the average Unknown Country. I think too many listeners of the show are expecting a guest to come on one week who is actually going to provide an answer to "What the Hell is Really Going On." My bets are on 'It ain't gonna happen...ever.'
 
I think too many listeners of the show are expecting a guest to come on one week who is actually going to provide an answer to "What the Hell is Really Going On." My bets are on 'It ain't gonna happen...ever.'
Click to expand...

You're quite correct there, but she should've at least paid lip service to the scientific inquiry question.

As for C2C, I listen when Michio Kaku is a guest.

And Strieber, his grey alien religion is tough on the digestion, so no Unknown Country for me.

<!-- / message -->
 
Well, I thought this show was kinda bland, myself. A lot of talk with not much really being said.

I did like her attitude concerning investigation methods, that there is no "right" way to do these things and different people use different techniques depending on their resources. I find this easier to accept, as opposed to the "my way is the only right way" school.

At the same time, some kind of standardization in the field could only be helpful, especially documentation-wise. Some people like to use tech stuff, cameras, recorders and such, while some people, like the guest, prefer to use their, or someone else's, "gifts". While that's all well and good, I think it would just be common sense for the "gifted" to be sure to bring some tech along just to document what they're doing. Without documentation, it all comes down to opinion and anecdotal evidence, which really isn't worth much to anyone besides the experiencer.

I also didn't notice the part where our intrepid hosts were being mean or rude. Considering how much she babbled on about nothing, I think Gene and Dave were pretty restrained.

I don't imagine she will be stopping by with any expert psychics/mediums as was suggested on the show. Go figure.

Keep it up, fellas!
 
skunkape said:
I think too many listeners of the show are expecting a guest to come on one week who is actually going to provide an answer to "What the Hell is Really Going On." My bets are on 'It ain't gonna happen...ever.'
Click to expand...


I am beginning to think that you are right! I listen to loads & loads of podcasts especially in regards to ghosts etc. and with the exception of some ITC researchers I really haven't heard much that I find particularly interesting.
 
One of the things I have noticed about "ghost hunters" is that they always talk about this stuff as if there isn't a scientific community laughing at the very thought. They talk about this stuff as if it's just an accepted fact that ghosts exist and they fit into X number of categories blah blah blah. That's what this lady did too. It drives me nuts. As we seek knowledge we can't just ignore what we've learned from science and critical thinking. It is absolutely essential and part of the answer. She did come off as a person who believes what she's saying as opposed to someone making things up for profit but her ideas were so looney and lacking any logical basis, I'm not sure there's much difference in terms of the damage being done. Perhaps it is even more dangerous.

David, you are not alone. There are others like you who try to maintain the balance of critical thinking and being open-minded. I, like you, am on a quest for knowledge and "truth" (if it can be obtained). Most of the other programs on this topic have hosts who start out with the same huge assumptions I mentioned above and are worthless to me. You guys do an excellent job of not doing that. I would have asked the exact same questions of this lady that you asked.
- If you have access to a ghost, then why not ask it some of these perplexing questions of life?
- Why wouldn't a ghost be busting at the seams to tell us the very things they themselves would loved to have known when they were alive?
- Why would a ghost speak only of nonsense and trivial matters? It just all seems a bit fishy to me.

I would also have focused on the whole "subjectivity versus an objective reality" line of questioning that Gene did. Excellent job. You exposed it for the complete nonsense that it is.

As you guys move forward and make your decision about things in this area, just know that what David has said is true. There are people out here in the audience who think just like you and appreciate and are benefiting greatly from the work you're doing. Keep up the good work.
 
Hi everyone, I'm a christian who has been listening to this show for quite a few months now and I must say that I love the show. Gene and David, I am a christian who is constantly questioning and learning about life and what the meaning and purpose of life. There is nothing in the bible that says we cannot learn and be inquisitive - for that is the nature of mankind. This is why I like the show because you two don't accept just word of mouth, but you question and seek to find answers.

The lady in this show seemed to contradict herself too many times to count. At one point she says she has a problem with 'religion' yet, seems to have a religion of her own which she follows but doesn't seem to quite to be at peace about. That must be because she has no clue what her beliefs lead to. It's open ended.

I'm not sure who mentioned this near the end of the show, Gene or David - you asked (paraphrasing) how could there be so many truths about the afterlife? I was thinking the same thing. How can she first say one thing, then turn the statement around and totally throw that away and say "well everybody has a different experience." In the end she has absolutely no answers, and hasn't helped one bit in this quest to understand this life.

From a christian perspective, I was amazed to hear her state that if she steps foot in a church the walls will probably catch on fire. Why is this? Does she feel that she has done something so evil that she will have a direct negative effect on the church building? Just a thought.

Gene and David, you are getting really good at questioning people who are involved with the paranormal. I can see how you are learning from different guests' as well as your own experiences and bringing them to the table in each successive interview. I am glad that you are stressing the importance of asking how do you know these 'ghosts' or 'apparitions' aren't already lying and deceiving you into believing what you are hearing from them. Once we get into the spiritual or ghost realm we are diving into what humans for the most part don't have a full understanding of. Even as a christian who has had paranormal experiences I do not always fully understand exactly how these things work.

So once again good work, and I hope and pray you will soon get some real answers. Until then, keep seeking.
 
Talk about an overreaction on Holzer's part! There was absolutely nothing disrespectful about the interview and David was right to question her reluctance about the setting of adequate scientific standards in paranormal research. It just goes to show how secteristic and close minded many people are in this particular field.

Hang in there David, you do a great job!
 
Jeez...I kinda feel bad for her after reading the email exchange. And her dad. He probably feels pride for his daughter, and this probably didn't do his heart any good. Ah, well. It is what it is.

I don't think it was a bad interview. And considering some of the recent episodes, I think dB was remarkably restrained. But the show's about exposing the bad while praising the good, yes? Job well done, have a beer.

In spite of feeling badly for her, I won't retract my previous comment. She's on the coattail express.
 
Back
Top