• SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+! For a low subscription fee, you will receive access to an ad-free version of The Paracast, the exclusive After The Paracast podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, plus show transcripts, the new Paracast+ Video Channel, Classic Episodes and Special Features categories! We now offer lifetime memberships! You can subscribe via this direct link:
    https://www.theparacast.com/plus/

    The Official Paracast Store is back! Check out our latest lineup of customized stuff at: The Official Paracast Store!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

November 4, 2018 — J. Adam Smith


Derek

Paranormal Novice
#2
guys, please, this really isn’t serious science/research is it? Really.. just hearsay, supposition and blah, blah - unfortunately what most of the ufo/paranormal field has reverted to.
I’ve been a listener since the beginning of Paracast - and been interested in the field on an off for 50 years pretty much in synch with Jacque Vallee’s on/off interest/exhasperation.
I think it’s time once more to call it a day in this field which has really gone nowhere fast and has just ended up recycling the same old old tired cases. Maybe the Trickster has prevailed after all?
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
#3
guys, please, this really isn’t serious science/research is it? Really.. just hearsay, supposition and blah, blah - unfortunately what most of the ufo/paranormal field has reverted to.
Thanks for your comments. Hopefully you caught mine during the show on that exact subject. I mentioned the work of Sharon A. Hill, author of Scientifical Americans, as well as how the terms he was using were often being used differently than in mainstream science, and attempted to get a clear definition of what he meant by them, as well as encouraged listeners to check out What The Bleep Debunked when he brought that up.

Ultimately the show ended before I could make my last key point about the difference between science and faith, which is that science is willing to adapt and change when contrary evidence is presented, whereas faith resists change. J. himself commented in the ATP that listening to what someone tells him won't change his faith. That is the very antithesis of science.

However I also felt it important not to come across as attacking him personally, because that wouldn't get anyone anyplace. My aim is to make people think about the issues for themselves by pointing out contradictions to their assumptions so that they're compelled by their own sense of reason to reconcile, or at least think deeper about them.
I’ve been a listener since the beginning of Paracast - and been interested in the field on an off for 50 years pretty much in synch with Jacque Vallee’s on/off interest/exhasperation.
I think it’s time once more to call it a day in this field which has really gone nowhere fast and has just ended up recycling the same old old tired cases. Maybe the Trickster has prevailed after all?
I can appreciate your sentiment there. What keeps me going are three things. The first is that the UFO mystery hasn't yet been fully resolved, and I submit that it is by virtue of there being a mystery, that UFO reports are worthy of continued study. After all, if the phenomenon had been solved, then we'd have even more reason to be bored with it wouldn't we?

The second is that there are young inexperienced people who have never heard of ufology, or have perhaps just had their first UFOs experience, and are only now getting interested in it. This is often a transformative time for such people, and they can benefit from good quality resources and the experience of others. In other words, it's not just about us.

Last but not least, there are many others who have witnessed some sort of alien craft, and because of that experience believe that there is a type of transport technology far superior to anything our civilization has. Tired as we may be of hearing the same old stories over and over again, we're still looking for and hoping for answers, and this is my small way of supporting them, contributing to the field, and helping to validate their experiences.

To offer a couple of thoughts on how to renew your own interest, there are two basic choices. Take a break from it until some reason to engage it again comes along ( which is what happened to me ), or become more actively involved by helping those who could use a hand with projects that are aligned with your own perspective. I'm sure there's no shortage of volunteer opportunities!
 
Last edited:

Derek

Paranormal Novice
#4
Well to my mind not only has the “ufo mystery” not be fully resolved - I don’t think there’s been any real progress at all. I’ve been following it for 50 years as I’ve said - so it’s not just a casual observation.
Added to this, over the
years, unfortunately have been a whole litany of crazy scams and schemes (eg those “Roswell” photos, Alien at the window, the one armed Swiss guy, some of the nutters appearing at Mufon events etc,
etc, etc).
This sort of thing just brings ridicule and derision to a subject that’s always been plauged by lack of credibility and scientific rigour at the best of times.
Even the latest “to the Stars Academy” scheme seems to be more SEC than UFO.
I appreciate that it can’t be easy getting grade A guests every week, but maybe there actually aren’t many and/or there’s nothing new to say so perhaps the subject no longer warrents weekly exposure ? Quality rather than quantity ?
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
#5
Well to my mind not only has the “ufo mystery” not be fully resolved - I don’t think there’s been any real progress at all. I’ve been following it for 50 years as I’ve said - so it’s not just a casual observation.
Added to this, over the
years, unfortunately have been a whole litany of crazy scams and schemes (eg those “Roswell” photos, Alien at the window, the one armed Swiss guy, some of the nutters appearing at Mufon events etc,
etc, etc).
This sort of thing just brings ridicule and derision to a subject that’s always been plauged by lack of credibility and scientific rigour at the best of times.
Even the latest “to the Stars Academy” scheme seems to be more SEC than UFO.
I appreciate that it can’t be easy getting grade A guests every week, but maybe there actually aren’t many and/or there’s nothing new to say so perhaps the subject no longer warrents weekly exposure ? Quality rather than quantity ?
Those are certainly fair comments within the context of solving the mystery of exactly where UFOs come from, how they work, and how they're made. But at the same time, it seems to me that the accumulation of reports over the years, the successes of FOIA requests, and the declassification of formerly secret official documents and programs, and ongoing efforts toward public awareness represents progress of a different kind.

You also make a points about the bad actors and problems around credibility and reliability, but IMO the solution to that isn't for those who are responsible to simply give up and let them go unchallenged. Exactly how to do that is another matter. I don't think the frequency of the show is the problem. I think it's more complex than that now. For my part, I'm just doing what I can with the opportunities and resources I have to work with.

I'd suggest that if you'd like to see more higher quality content, that you get involved in helping to provide and create it. After following ufology for 50 years you must have some good insight into the subject. How a about putting that to use in a positive way that goes beyond being critical and helps to clarify or illuminate the issues you feel are most important?
 

Derek

Paranormal Novice
#6
Well the Paracast is supposed to be the Gold Standard - so to me, as far as guests are concerned, this should surely mean credibility, quality, academic rigour, integrity. Proper PhD’s like Dr. Vallee - not someone who gets their qualifications by mail order, or other of the more recent “fringe” grade guests who seemed to have been mere fillers of airtime really.

I’d certainly listen again if you featured someone like Eric Ouellet - a PhD from Toronto’s York University whose book “Illuminations” proposed interesting and thought provoking new insights to the phenomena - now he would really be worth listening to.

Anyway - I wish you’s the best and will keep an eye on what will hopefully be upcoming episodes that are truly Gold Standard
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
#7
Well the Paracast is supposed to be the Gold Standard - so to me, as far as guests are concerned, this should surely mean credibility, quality, academic rigour, integrity. Proper PhD’s like Dr. Vallee - not someone who gets their qualifications by mail order, or other of the more recent “fringe” grade guests who seemed to have been mere fillers of airtime really.

I’d certainly listen again if you featured someone like Eric Ouellet - a PhD from Toronto’s York University whose book “Illuminations” proposed interesting and thought provoking new insights to the phenomena - now he would really be worth listening to.

Anyway - I wish you’s the best and will keep an eye on what will hopefully be upcoming episodes that are truly Gold Standard
I appreciate the suggestions, and will see if we can get Eric Ouellet on the show. Can you send me his contact info or post a link? This is all on volunteer time for me and I have a lot of other things to catch up on, so every little bit of help is appreciated.
 

Top