• 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!

November 13, 2016 — Bob Zanotti with Goggs Mackay


Gene Steinberg

Forum Super Hero
Staff member
An eclectic episode featuring old school paranormal broadcaster and Paracast announcer Bob Zanotti and forum moderator Goggs Mackay.

We did enter the political realm, mostly about the impact on UFO disclosure as the result of Clinton's loss, or would it have had any impact? But we aren't taking any partisan positions; its just a natural outgrowth of the subject of how Presidents of the U.S. handle UFOs.

Some of this discussion continues on this week's episode of After The Paracast, an exclusive feature of The Paracast+. Gene poses a wacky conspiracy theory about the election, again without taking any partisan positions.

You can check out The Paracast+ (and our new, lower rates) at: https://www.theparacast.com/plus/
 
Interesting show, and good to learn a bit more about Mr. Zanotti. It's really unfortunate that Stephen Bassett is unwilling to make an appearance on the show, as I'm sure it would go a long way towards normalizing him among more centrist UFO-interested thinkers.

CuCullen
 
Good show and Goggs always has a way of landing complex points in a way that's easy to digest.

Would like to add on the discussion regarding disclosure where it was proposed the military/government are as clueless as us to the nature of the phenomenon... would tend to disagree slightly...

Presuming the military are aware of the phenomenon from pilot reports and the nuclear base events you would have to assume they would make an effort to understand the phenomenon even if it is to determine if what they are encountering is terrestrial military enemy, if you look at the investment of resources during the cold war for example to understand soviet tech it was an enormous effort. It's their Job to own the airspace and understand all threats so UFO's must be of great interest.

You would have to assume that the military would come to similar conclusions on how to understand what they are dealing with to those that the UFOlogoy field are suggesting such as chris with gravitometers, spectral analysis, visual light, thermo analysis etc etc

With the resources available to them (presuming ufos are a real mystery and not military in origin) you would have to assume the military have 'levelled up' their understanding by now and probably have some good info regarding the physical nature of UFO's such as their physical appearance, gravitational disturbance, propulsion capability, chemical composition and some other titbits they could garner from sensory analysis.

Even in the 60's, orbiting satellites had resolution down to 3 inches at the earths surface. If UFO's are real the military must have a hi res picture of one by now.

True they may still not know if it's alien or time travellers, machines or beings etc etc but in the dark to the extent of all of us me doth think not
 
Very rarely post but really enjoyed this as I've always been fascinated with the so called golden age of ufos. You must have bob on more often Gene as he has a very clear level headed view with very interesting observations regarding todays stance on the subject matter compared to back in the day, also gogs I enjoy listening to as his thoughts pretty much mirror mine especially regarding governments which him and Bob talked about. Great show fellas
 
I thought after last time you'd avoid listening to any show I'm in! You must ask yourself, 'Why on Earth do they have him back on-air at all?

It's always announced ahead of being heard, so there is no likelihood of stumbling onto a show with me in it, unawares...

If you listen to another show that features me, one can only assume either you are a glutton for punishment, or are hoping a reason to complain presents itself!

I think we established you don't particularly enjoy hearing me on the show, and your opinion of me is only going to be even lower the more often you hear me. So, just skip the shows I am on and bingo, a Goggs-free existence! Seriously, make this last one the last time you listen to me! If you re-appear in the future over any more yet-to-be-made shows, it would speak volumes to motivation.....
 
With a signature like yours I can see why it's difficult for you to comprehend things.

May pauline hanson marry into your family and spend every Christmas with you asking you to please explain
Id suggest that your thongs are too tight, but the audience here will misread that and have visions of budgie smugglers two sizes too small
Oh the humanity, i think my VB may be warm now
Pickle me grandmother, not the kingswood. Ive just ipana'd the grill
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think the only references I got out of that without help was Pauline Hanson and VB (Victoria Bitter I assume)

Thanks goodness for Google.com.au
 
I'm sorry you feel that way, but I am not obliged to take orders from you.
I have a right to give feedback that is within the boundaries of the terms & conditions.
You have the option to ignore a comment you see from my username in threads if you so desire.

As you know, I've never even suggested censoring a single syllable you have written and I of course agree that you are totally entitled to make critical comments, positive and negative, about any shows. You do stay within all boundaries of decency and state your case in a reasonable tone.

I am quite exasperated though, that your earlier comments lamenting why you should be subjected to even a single sentence from myself, are ample proof you have no desire to listen to me on the show. Fine. But coming back to complain again about something you already dislike, but fail to avoid listening to something that is about as avoidable as anything can be.

Criticism is fine but you are choosing to put yourself through something that you proclaim to be a terrible thing, repeatedly, to get the same end result.
Change your listening habits occasionally and take an aspirin and lie down, and you can rid yourself of the painful memories of the shows that haunt your consciousness seemingly.

But
whatever you do, don't listen to the Paracast when you dislike a stand-in host!
 
One can always bang one's head repeatedly against a wall, my understanding is that it feels good when you stop.
 
Back
Top