• 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 29, 2017 — Col. John B. Alexander


Gene Steinberg

Forum Super Hero
Staff member
Whenever we talk to Col. John B. Alexander, we know that what he has to say will require more than a single episode to cover.

So this time, we asked him to return for this weekend's episode of After The Paracast, an exclusive feature of The Paracast+, to continue and expand on subjects discussed in the main episode.

So after listening to The Paracast, if you want to hear the "rest of the story," you'll want to sign up for The Paracast+. For more information about our premium subscription service, please check:

Introducing The Paracast+ | The Paracast — The Gold Standard of Paranormal Radio
 
It's a shame no one is interested in talking about the latest episode of the Paracast w/ John Alexander. He signed up a couple of days ago to post on the forum, but no one seems interested enough to engage in any dialogs! I'm really surprised!
 
It's a shame no one is interested in talking about the latest episode of the Paracast w/ John Alexander. He signed up a couple of days ago to post on the forum, but no one seems interested enough to engage in any dialogs! I'm really surprised!

I'll listen to the show and probably have some comment. I see that reincarnation was brought up.
 
It's a shame no one is interested in talking about the latest episode of the Paracast w/ John Alexander. He signed up a couple of days ago to post on the forum, but no one seems interested enough to engage in any dialogs! I'm really surprised!

Life intrudes.

I appreciate the way Dr.Alexander speaks; very precise in what he does and does not say. No room for misinterpretation. More like that please! Just downloaded and started ‘Reality Denied’. I listened to the episode yesterday and these are just my observations, not really questions.

Precognitive Sentient Phenomenon. Subjectively I have always felt there to be a presence - one so close you feel as if you can almost reach out and touch it. I am a secular, grounded, technical person and not prone to hyperbole but a few very personal experiences have led me to form this belief over a number of years. Two with close family members during their ‘transition’ have me thinking that there absolutely is more to our existence than what we see around us. The skeptic in me can’t help but think that that particular belief is probably essential our basic wiring as human beings – maybe it comes along with sentience. In terms of human evolution if we have something it’s there for a reason even if it may not be obvious. The skeptic’s voice in my inner dialogue is a bit weak on this topic though.

There are a number of minor synchronicities I’ve noticed that also factor into this belief. Not sure what to make of them and all I really do is note them. Most are so absurd I’d be embarrassed to repeat them but they do serve to reinforce the notion that there is something slightly out of reach…. not very far away at all… that will communicate occasionally. If that something interacted with me more physically and directly I’d probably be glad for the reinforcement and petrified at the same time. I have never connected any of these thoughts specifically to UFOs - only because I have never seen one - but the idea of a PSP intrigues me.

The definition of a PSP happens to fit my dog, Pie. She seems to read my mind, is highly intelligent and can be absolutely devious when it comes to certain things.
 
I listened to the show and for me I found that the col. falls into the UFO trap that a lot of proponents of the field fall for: faith in human testimony.

E.g. the col. says that things are happening that shouldn't vs. our current understanding of science, which is all based on the premise of witness testimony being a 100% accurate interpretation of the event.

I think a lot of the more skeptical voices on this forum believe that the phenomenon can be largely explained by military activity, misidentification of natural or prosaic, memory change over time, military misinformation, charlatans and ideologues.

Therefore all though these people are reporting that things are happening that shouldn't be happening vs. accepted scientific constructs the skeptic may say that this is because it falls into one of the above categories and therefore DOES most likely get explained away if we had more data of the event.

And I hate to be negative but I will, it was compounded by the col. saying that UFOs showed signs of interdimensional activity. This is a ludicrous assertion. There is no evidence for any other spacial dimension other than the ones we experience and can measure. If they do exist we have no idea how they would interact with the dimensions we know about. It just sounds scientific to talk about extra dimensions but to me it illustrates a lack of scientific understanding because it shows you really don't understand physics at all when you hear people using this clap trap to try and explain UFO activity.

So sorry to be negative but I wanted to respond to Chris appeal for commentary on the show
 
There you go again dude, making broad brushed, sweeping condemnations. JA does not solely rely exclusively on anecdotal testimony. If you want to call his own experiences into question, that's your business and if you had read his book, you'd know what I am talking about. His real-time experiences combined w/ his associate's work over many years cannot be underestimated, IMO. He actually gets out of his freaking armchair and he travels around the world visiting sites and individuals that challenge all aspects of his inquiring reality view. You should try it sometime. He has worked w/ many world-class folks in their respective fields and comes to us w/ more than a simple, informed opinion. Not even a nice try dude...
 
I always thought of Alexander as a skeptic because he denies the government is interested/knows anything about UFOs. It was a pleasant surprise to see how open-minded he is.

He never denied the phenomenon was real, just the alleged government coverup or secret knowledge.

I too consider reincarnation to be plausible.

I don't. It's not rational.
 
the phenomenon can be largely explained by military activity, misidentification of natural or prosaic, memory change over time, military misinformation, charlatans and ideologues.

I actually agree. Nothing has changed in decades. It's the small percentage that can't be explained away that's the problem. Like that's anything new.

I'm in the middle of JBA's book and have have noted a few small things that I have taken exception to but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. He has a fascinating background and in my opinion, is well worth listening to.

As a newbie just sitting on edge of this forum dangling my toes in I see people wrapping themselves in cloaks of assumed authority, snarkiness, finger pointing and opinion-flag planting. God forbid anyone expresses an honest opinion.

I do enjoy the show and appreciate the effort put forth to create it. It has given me a number of excellent book recommendations. I signed on to post the occasional comment because of a general interest but am now beginning to wonder why. This is entertainment, not 'research'
 
... doesn't make human testimony anymore reliable

Maybe preface your next request for comments with ' please only comment with things I will like to hear'
Logically, that would include your testimony in these forums being considered unreliable.

Frankly, I do not believe that you believe much of what you say. Your behaviour seems more consistent with stirring the pot just so people will respond to you.
 
I actually just finished the episode after getting a bit caught up after travelling for work. I was actually surprised at his interest and knowledge in other areas of the paranormal. One of the better recent episodes for sure.
 
Logically, that would include your testimony in these forums being considered unreliable.

Frankly, I do not believe that you believe much of what you say. Your behaviour seems more consistent with stirring the pot just so people will respond to you.

Not true, I'm calling it as I see it, I just don't latch on to the mantra of person A said this happened, therefore must be true. Applying critical thinking on this forum is seen by some as heretic

(especially when it brings into question human testimony and some people have spent a lot of time working with human testimony and really don't want to have it brought under the microscope as unreliable data)

When someone lashes out at you in anger it's a sure sign you have hit the nerve. Its not my intention to do that but its obviously happened here.
 
When someone lashes out at you in anger it's a sure sign you have hit the nerve. Its not my intention to do that but its obviously happened here.
Not anger dude, exasperation and sadness. You have a bug up your ass about me and it is obvious to anyone that follows your posts. THAT makes me exasperated and reactive. YOU come across as someone who enjoys baiting others, or as Marduk put it, you are "a pot stirrer." I don't waste my time on "anger" — its misallocated energy. Believe me: I have plenty of other people, places, things, issues and topics to expend my energy upon and YOU ain't one of them!
 
Not true, I'm calling it as I see it, I just don't latch on to the mantra of person A said this happened, therefore must be true. Applying critical thinking on this forum is seen by some as heretic

(especially when it brings into question human testimony and some people have spent a lot of time working with human testimony and really don't want to have it brought under the microscope as unreliable data)

When someone lashes out at you in anger it's a sure sign you have hit the nerve. Its not my intention to do that but its obviously happened here.
I’m confused by your logic.

Is it only other people except you that are unreliable?
 
You have a bug up your ass about me

This isn't true, one of the reasons I first listened and stuck with the paracast was because I really enjoyed the critical thinking you applied to the topics.

I feel you are the attack dog between the two of us and I don't come at you with name calling or slurs.

A pot stirrer to one man, maybe seen by someone else as someone who is bringing another perspective.

You have on the paracast bemoaned how people are stuck in their bubble these days and shut out other people's views and I can't help but think you do that with mine just because they are different.

If we ask people like stan to take another look at Roswell because the understanding of the evidence has moved on, why can't we widen that premise to human testimony? It's time to rethink its value to understanding the UFO reality. There is now so much better understanding of how our brain world a and how recall of events can be innacurate.

I get this is sensitive as people have invested time and money making the effort to visit people and look them in the eye but it doesn't make the validity of the evidence any more real.

I reckon we are both on this forum because we are interested in what maybe the reality of the UFO phenomenon, were on the same team if that is the case.

I have been following the field for about 20 years and I have seen it go nowhere and I would apportion a big part of the blame to the field trying to present the reality off the basis of human testimony. It won't work, it never will.

We need to use human testimony only as an aid to design scientific experiments that will garner instrumented data. Trying to make assertions about the UFO reality from human testimony is part of the problem of the field as it perpetuates the stalemate with the scientific community.

I'm not putting these points forward just to be controversial for the sake of it
 
I’m confused by your logic.

Is it only other people except you that are unreliable?

Not at all. If I witnessed an event and later recalled it, it would be as unreliable a piece of evidence as anyone else's. My argument is that all human testimony is not a reliable source of data, mine included.

I think you are getting my criticism of witness testimony confused with critical thinking and opinion my friend
 
Not at all. If I witnessed an event and later recalled it, it would be as unreliable a piece of evidence as anyone else's. My argument is that all human testimony is not a reliable source of data, mine included.

I think you are getting my criticism of witness testimony confused with critical thinking and opinion my friend

I’m not confusing anything.

What is your purpose here?
 
Back
Top