• 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!

October 25, 2015 — Stanton T. Friedman


Forums New posts
i'm still in the military and 100% agree theres some information that the HEAD SHED don't want in the public domain some of its very mundane and some of it is well up there with you don't need to know ever thats why its pointless even going after disclosure on military projects especially in america as your military is very tight lipped about such things,and will not crack on Opsec.
even some low soldier back in the day would of seen something but no one has come fourth only civilians in that era have come forward with so called deathbed confessions.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
He seems to have some fixed scripts that he recites in responses to questions. I noticed the same reactions when he was on the show last year. So I had to carefully and strategically interrupt the spiel to get more nuanced answers. This is particularly true when I questioned him about UFO abductions, and the approach taken by Dr. Jacobs.

When someone has been interviewed as often as he has, it's tempting to resort to canned responses.
Click to expand...
Or you could ask different questions

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
 
jeff.oram said:
Or you could ask different questions

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

With the greatest respect:

Generally a few days before a guest is interviewed, a thread will be created that gives you the opportunity to ask the guest questions.
I have used this many times and if time permits your question will be asked, I can see that you joined the forum months ago, so you had the opportunity to ask Mr Friedman anything you wanted, its a bit late to moan now.

Just in case: here is the area where guest questions can be asked: The Question Bank
 
Han said:
With the greatest respect:

Generally a few days before a guest is interviewed, a thread will be created that gives you the opportunity to ask the guest questions.
I have used this many times and if time permits your question will be asked, I can see that you joined the forum months ago, so you had the opportunity to ask Mr Friedman anything you wanted, its a bit late to moan now.

Just in case: here is the area where guest questions can be asked: The Question Bank
Click to expand...
Han,
I appreciate the information that u shared, but I was commenting on Genes comment about Stanton answering questions the same way. My suggestion was that if he had concerns that Stanton would answer questions with rehearsed answers, he could have asked different questions. That's what I would do. I'd ask him fresh questions that would require him to answer spontaneously. I don't look an the forums that often.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
 
I am not 100% sure but I think there is a way to get alerts when a new thread is posted? (it might be worth asking a moderator about this) I know this happens when you join a thread and new messages are posted.

Just out of interest what would you have asked Mr Friedman?
I would be happy to ask on your behalf the next time he comes on the show, or alternatively (no promises) I could try and PM you if I spot that he is about to be interviewed and you could ask yourself.
 
Harry, there's a Watch Forum option below the list of featured threads. You can use that to be notified when there are new posts. Your member control panel can be set to notify you by Alerts or email, or both (the default setting is both).

Or just check the Question Bank Tuesday or Wed. of each week to see what's upcoming.
 
jeff.oram said:
I was commenting on Genes comment about Stanton answering questions the same way. My suggestion was that if he had concerns that Stanton would answer questions with rehearsed answers, he could have asked different questions. That's what I would do. I'd ask him fresh questions that would require him to answer spontaneously. I don't look an the forums that often.
Click to expand...

The first question Stanton was asked is an example of what Gene was referring to. Gene asked for Stanton’s assessment of Dr. Jacobs’ abduction work. Stanton responded by talking about Roswell, the stealth aircraft, the U-2 and spy satellites. The Jacobs question was a fresh question.

I really like and enjoy Stanton. But I thought this show was a particular struggle to get him to respond to the questions.
 
Sand said:
The first question Stanton was asked is an example of what Gene was referring to. Gene asked for Stanton’s assessment of Dr. Jacobs’ abduction work. Stanton responded by talking about Roswell, the stealth aircraft, the U-2 and spy satellites. The Jacobs question was a fresh question.

I really like and enjoy Stanton. But I thought this show was a particular struggle to get him to respond to the questions.
Click to expand...
I was bothered by gene asking for proof so many times, but maybe I'm just not big on interrupting people. I'm going to listen to it again, but I want to reiterate that I'm only sharing my opinion.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
 
Gene, you're way too sensitive. I wasn't even talking to you. Seriously man, I'm one person that saw it differently. Get a grip, people don't always see things the same way as you... And the sun will still come up tomorrow.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
 
Stanton has a well oiled finely tuned delivery. What irks me is why the press never scrutinized special report 14 and challenged the military who were responsible for these studies and dished out contradictory declarations.

http://www.ufocasebook.com/pdf/specialreport14.pdf

Beyond Roswell, focus should be on that blue book special report number 14 dating back to 1955 and especially the discrepancy between it and the official declarations.

My favorite quote:
'UFOs are not a threat to national security'

Why is that you might ask?

Well here is my take (and probably every one on this site) on that quote:
National security is organized around threats of earthly or non-earthly origin whose nature is known and identifiable. Security exists within the limits of technological capabilities that have historically enabled a nation to protect and sustain itself. Beyond these limits nothing can be done... Thus, for any country on this planet, if an ET craft decides to attack it falls into 'Act of God' category. There is no insurance policy you can buy for this and Michio Kaku's stepping on ants analogy kicks in big time.

General Ramey yells: We're not touching this with a billion foot pole. Weather balloon dammit !

In essence, good luck guys if you meet a nasty ET critter... enjoy every day they let you live lol! They can come here from there but we can't go there yet... and who knows how many years of scientific and technical advancement is prerequisite to that capability. 1000 years, 10,000 ? A million ?

The designated 20% unknown in the project blue book reports might be the shadow of giants whose foot you really don't want crashing down on you and the speculation on visitation intents can be as wide as your imagination... I like the farming and quarantine ideas. From an ET point of view, nuclear blasts are definitely a farming deal-breaker and an interstellar attack cruiser heading to your home world is a definite quarantine buster ;)

Entertainment at it's best :)
 
A lot of what Friedman says makes good sense, but for Roswell, I suggest that there is a better explanation than two flying saucers colliding in mid air. For that matter it's arguable that there are better explanations than UFOs period. However I'm of the opinion that something odd did happen, and that a downed UFO is a possibility that cannot be entirely dismissed. In order to alleviate the concern that @withoutlimits09 had asked, my take on the case, is that assuming there were two crash sites as Stanton claims, that both sites stem from a single craft.

I say this because the stuff on Brazel's ranch was more of what has been described as a "debris field" rather than an impact site, and the amount of stuff collected from there doesn't appear to add-up to that of an entire craft. Stanton's suggestion that the craft came apart at some altitude is however reasonable, but rather than assuming a mid-air crash, it makes more sense to assume a technical malfunction, or even the possibility, that if the radars were on ( as he stated ), that it was actually shot down, and that part of the story has never been told.

Assuming radar as the cause of a malfunction is IMO really a stretch for something as advanced as an alien craft. So what if UFOs have been known to stall cars? I highly doubt that UFOs work on the principle of the internal combustion engine. Technology involving superconductors, high-power magnets, and as of yet undiscovered antigravity propulsion seem far more likely to me, and any such tech would be shielded from anything as weak as 1947 radar transmitters.

On the other hand, being near a high security Air Force base with the radar on, maybe they saw the UFO on approach and vectored a few aircraft to intercept, and they actually managed to score a lucky hit, and then followed the main craft to the second crash site, ignoring the stuff that fell away onto Brazel's ranch. After all, just remember the headlines: "RAAF Captures Flying Saucer on Ranch in Roswell." How did they know it was a flying saucer just from a Jeep full of tin foil? They couldn't have. But forcing one down on an intercept is a lot more like the "capture" of a "Flying Saucer".

But even if it wasn't a shoot down, then there's still the possibility of a technical malfunction. There was a thunderstorm in the vicinity and if I recall correctly, one person reported hearing thunder and another boom "not like thunder". While radar is weak as an offensive weapon, the power in a lightning bolt is enormous and hotter than the surface of the Sun. Our conventional aircraft are rarely disabled by a direct lightning strike, however our aircraft also work on different principles. I've actually seen an airliner get a direct hit from a lightning strike, and I'm sure the passengers inside got a good scare.

So if we assume UFOs utilize some type of high-energy superconducting system, a direct hit might overload that, resulting in a containment breach, and an explosion, causing debris to fall on Brazel's ranch, and the craft to lose propulsion and crash some distance later, where the main retrieval took place.

Just some food for thought. Both better than a radar induced mid-air collision ( IMO ).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top