• 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!

Off Topic Archives

Visit the all-new Tech Night Owl Store

Status
Not open for further replies.

DavidVincent

Paranormal Maven
#1
I’ve been working my way through your archives again - some of these are really excellent - can’t you tempt Mr.Biedny back ??
I’ve tried a couple of the recent ones and I must agree with the member above with respect to the last one.
Wouldn’t it be possible to get Mr Vallee back - or maybe someone from Cufos, or To The Stars?? Or maybe even a real scammer who can be exposed? I think it would be more interesting to have some real scientific rigour or some debunking entertainment
 

urkotic

Hopeful Monster
#2
I’ve been working my way through your archives again - some of these are really excellent - can’t you tempt Mr.Biedny back ??
I’ve tried a couple of the recent ones and I must agree with the member above with respect to the last one.
Wouldn’t it be possible to get Mr Vallee back - or maybe someone from Cufos, or To The Stars?? Or maybe even a real scammer who can be exposed? I think it would be more interesting to have some real scientific rigour or some debunking entertainment
A real scammer on the Paracast? That would be novel.
 

DavidVincent

Paranormal Maven
#3
By a scammer I guess really mean someone who is maybe putting a radical ufo claim/contactee story out there. There were a couple of examples in the archives where Mr. Biedny did some quite masterful debunking of supposed "evidence". But of course the clincher was that he had technical expertise in the areas of computer generated graphics/photo analysis. I'm aware that a recent Mufon convention included people who claimed that they'd been living on Mars - crazy stuff that like that. The Roswell slides scam where big money was involved - and so on?
Are there no contactee claims going on down these days, or U.S. representatives of strange ufo belief cults? Maybe they don't abound so much these days :)
 

GlitteringBadger

Skilled Investigator
#5
By a scammer I guess really mean someone who is maybe putting a radical ufo claim/contactee story out there. There were a couple of examples in the archives where Mr. Biedny did some quite masterful debunking of supposed "evidence". But of course the clincher was that he had technical expertise in the areas of computer generated graphics/photo analysis. I'm aware that a recent Mufon convention included people who claimed that they'd been living on Mars - crazy stuff that like that. The Roswell slides scam where big money was involved - and so on?
Are there no contactee claims going on down these days, or U.S. representatives of strange ufo belief cults? Maybe they don't abound so much these days :)
I suspect the Paracast's history and reputation is well known enough that real juicy targets for such an operation would steer clear. Would be fun to listen to though!
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
#7
Hardly bother now since the show is consistently terrible.
Right about the time Chris O’brien quit.
Yes we all miss Chris, but I don't see you doing or even attempting to do anything to improve things, and frankly I'm getting bored with your constant lack of constructive criticism. If you want to do something to improve The Paracast, then try creating some good content for the forum, help source out guests that you think would make our audience happier, participate in a positive way in The Question Bank, and quit being so chronically negative.
 

DavidVincent

Paranormal Maven
#8
I just don't know - this UFO field really doesn't seem to have changed much from the mess it got itself in way back years ago. Which is why many of us just left it all behind in disgust and why most scientists won't go anywhere near it. Even now so much infighting, name calling and squabbling - and so many financial scams and hoaxes. Taking a look into [ ] as was suggested here previously - and just tapping Gene's/Paracast's name into Google it all comes gushing out like a ruptured sewer. It also seems that the two previous co-hosts exited on less than good terms - having previously done all of the "heavy lifting" in both show participation and more importantly sourcing guest bookings? Anyway, whatever - it's not a good look for a subject which has always been subject to much ridicule and derision. Once your reputation is lost it's all over really - same as in politics I guess. But maybe this all just the cunning plan of the Men in Black???
 
Last edited by a moderator:

urkotic

Hopeful Monster
#9
I just don't know - this UFO field really doesn't seem to have changed much from the mess it got itself in way back years ago. Which is why many of us just left it all behind in disgust and why most scientists won't go anywhere near it. Even now so much infighting, name calling and squabbling - and so many financial scams and hoaxes. Taking a look into AlienExpanse as was suggested here previously - and just tapping Gene's/Paracast's name into Google it all comes gushing out like a ruptured sewer. It also seems that the two previous co-hosts exited on less than good terms - having previously done all of the "heavy lifting" in both show participation and more importantly sourcing guest bookings? Anyway, whatever - it's not a good look for a subject which has always been subject to much ridicule and derision. Once your reputation is lost it's all over really - same as in politics I guess. But maybe this all just the cunning plan of the Men in Black???
It's funny, I agree with much of what you say, and yet I will respectfully disagree that in UFOlogy / the paranormal 'field' your reputation is so critical.

I agree that it seems like your reputation should be important. I mean let's face it, we are wholly in the realm of 'believe it or not' here. If the claims and theories all could be easily proven and communicated, they wouldn't be filed under paranormal. With UFOs so much of this comes down to, who do you believe? Does the witness or researcher seem credible? (Even then if they appear sincere, could they be misinterpreting or just wrong...? Could they be delusional? Are they conning you?)

So yeah I feel like reputation should be a big deal. For me with Phil Imbrogno for example. I was interested enough in the topics he covered and he had a good enough reputation I bought one of his books back when. I stopped reading it when I came across some wild claim, but I didn't dismiss everything connected with him, just decided he was more squirrelly than he seemed. Then all the deception came to light and it was, OK, I'm done with this guy.

And yet - I believe he could make a comeback, to some extent anyway. Others have. David Rountree has been exposed and is still operating. Many other claimants and personalities have been torn down (at least I see it that way) or taken seriously credibility hits, and yet still have going concerns (I'm thinking of Greer).

There are certainly authors out there where I don't think they believe what they're peddling, and many would acknowledge it. They're just serving up what someone, somewhere wants to read.

My own assessment, people want to believe, or have their minds somewhat made up, and are biased in favor of those who can give them their fix of UFO belief. Others just enjoy the topic.

But yeah I agree you'd think when nothing can be proven your reputation and personal credibility would mean everything, yet it does not seem that way to me.
 

urkotic

Hopeful Monster
#10
And, I don't know if it's completely related or not, but that will to believe is one reason I think some topics just never ever die. That little thrill of hope you get sometimes - what if? What if it's true? More fun to think so than not, certainly.

But another is just, there are a lot of people who get casually interested in UFOs and can easily find some YouTube video (or etc.) of something thoroughly debunked and get excited about it. Everyone has to have their first time seeing the alien autopsy video or what have you after all.
 

DavidVincent

Paranormal Maven
#11
Hi - I wasn't really referring to "reputation" with respect to an individual's beliefs - not matter how apparently crazy or seemingly deluded - ultimately all we have in this field are our own beliefs and for some their apparent experiences - although even after 70 odd years nothing tangible has been proven. But rather with respect to involvement in outright deceptions, hoaxes and scams - particularly where there are financial implications. e.g. Roswell Slides to name but one :)
 

DavidVincent

Paranormal Maven
#12
Anyway, I think that Vallee pretty much hits the spot when it comes to this crazy subject and it's relationship with other paranormal phenomena - in that it's some sort of projection and/or control mechanism imposed on us by elements not as yet identified - which may well be human or not. Which is far more interesting than nut&bolts saucers and pure ETH. It would seem that only time will tell.
 

urkotic

Hopeful Monster
#13
Hi - I wasn't really referring to "reputation" with respect to an individual's beliefs - not matter how apparently crazy or seemingly deluded - ultimately all we have in this field are our own beliefs and for some their apparent experiences - although even after 70 odd years nothing tangible has been proven. But rather with respect to involvement in outright deceptions, hoaxes and scams - particularly where there are financial implications. e.g. Roswell Slides to name but one :)
Ah, OK, got you.

Ugh yeah that slides thing, that was bonkers. No one who participated should have escaped without a seriously credibility hit, imho.
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
#15
I just don't know - this UFO field really doesn't seem to have changed much from the mess it got itself in way back years ago. Which is why many of us just left it all behind in disgust and why most scientists won't go anywhere near it. Even now so much infighting, name calling and squabbling - and so many financial scams and hoaxes. Taking a look into [ ] as was suggested here previously - and just tapping Gene's/Paracast's name into Google it all comes gushing out like a ruptured sewer. It also seems that the two previous co-hosts exited on less than good terms - having previously done all of the "heavy lifting" in both show participation and more importantly sourcing guest bookings? Anyway, whatever - it's not a good look for a subject which has always been subject to much ridicule and derision. Once your reputation is lost it's all over really - same as in politics I guess. But maybe this all just the cunning plan of the Men in Black???
I was recruited into AE as well, and my experience there led me to conclude that it's run and frequented by smear campaigners against Gene, so it's not surprising you'd be inundated with all their trash talk. But it didn't work with me. At first I tried to avoid it, but they kept following me around in an attempt to covert me.

Finally, when I expressed differing opinions about their "evidence" I was summarily banned. As mentioned before, I've talked with Gene and Chris and exchanged emails with Biendy regarding the issues, and virtually all the negativity specifically about Gene stems from subjective and negative interpretations designed for the sole purpose of smearing Gene. People who can think for themselves and are able to consider all aspects of an issue see through it.

Apart from that, every field has is malcontents, sometimes far more volatile. Even the Church, which is supposed to be the pinnacle of moral standards is fraught with problems. One solution is to ignore it all or hide from it. Another is to chronically complain. Another is to try to do something positive to make it better. As a ufologist, I like to encourage the latter.
 

urkotic

Hopeful Monster
#16
As mentioned before, I've talked with Gene and Chris and exchanged emails with Biendy regarding the issues, and virtually all the negativity specifically about Gene stems from subjective and negative interpretations designed for the sole purpose of smearing Gene. People who can think for themselves and are able to consider all aspects of an issue see through it.
Subjective... open minded... I hope you realize with such criteria others may reach different conclusions from yourself, and there is nothing illegitimate about every single one of those assessments. I don't think David Biedny for example is automatically right about everything but neither am I going to dismiss any of his conclusions out of hand. I don't have much of a read on Chris O'Brien but have never seen him characterized as smearing people.
 

DavidVincent

Paranormal Maven
#17
I don't really want to get embroiled in this spat - but now some of these issues have been raised in both places it might be as well to get the other side's view on just a couple of things. So Messrs Obrien & Biedny and Paracast are all patched up now? And more importantly it's all smears about these hundreds of begging emails going back over many years? They're totally faked or something? Just a yes or no will do - I really don't want to get into a ufo-spat :)
 

Gene Steinberg

Forum Super Hero
Staff member
#18
Just FYI: The stalkers have sent one or more fake complaints to the firms for whom I do my outside gigs. They are trying to keep me from earning a living.

What's more, a lot of the toxic postings I see are posted by the same small band of trolls, some of whom appear under multiple names. Without the hate brigade, this field would be a far better place. Just put them all on ignore.
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
#19
Only my opinion but I have a hard time believing he has read everything that is available to be read.
I don't know about "everything" but I've read through and heard a number of opinions including those from the AE posters, COB, Biendny, and Gene.
Court cases can be misunderstood when viewed out of context but they are not slander. Recounting or documenting someone's actual behavior is not a smear campaign.
It's a smear campaign when there's a persistent and coordinated effort to present information ( truthful or otherwise ) that is spun in such a way as to denigrate a person, and that seems exactly what's been going on. I went to AE to see what it was about and made a concerted effort to avoid discussion about Gene's situation, but was followed from thread to thread by posters who attempted to convert me to their negative points of view, and when it didn't work I was banned. At the same time, the people who attempted to recruit me there have been coming here and poaching people. Then there's all the BS I don't see out on Twitter and Facebook, which I don't even want to get started on. In the meantime, I'm trying to make a positive difference. It would be nice to see others do the same.
And it's noteworthy when they attempt to suppress any mention or discussion of said behavior, even while persisting in the behavior. I realize I am doing what I suggested USI Calgary is doing - asserting that anyone reviewing the evidence has to reach the same conclusion as myself or they are wrong. So he and I will just disagree and each think the other badly mistaken. And likely this post deleted and my account banned and that is fine with me.
I have no intention of banning you for that post, but I can't speak for what Gene might do. Either way you're free to send me a private email. Let's also get something else straight. As a matter of principle, I never require people to think the same way I do or deem them "wrong". I ask them to explain themselves and then assess their views on the merits of their rationale. It just so happens that most of the time people can't substantiate their views sufficiently enough to outweigh mine, and I don't see it as reasonable to trade a better substantiated view for one that is full of holes.

Like everyone else, if you want to examine the issues in a fair minded manner, then I invite you to do so. Perhaps you should start by trying to identify exactly what the issues are? Where do you want to begin? Let's take them one by one.
 
Last edited:

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
#20
Anyway this whole field now seems to be, sadly, as toxic as it ever was :(
You mean like politics, or law, or medicine, or sports, or religion, or any number of toxic employers, or toxic relationships? Why single out the paranormal? Maybe it also has some really positive aspects, but some people are too busy being so negative that they can't focus on it anymore. If you want it to be more positive then be the change you want to see.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top