-
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!
Stanford and O'Brien Episode - October 4, 2009
- Thread starter bluecat
- Start date
Free episodes:
jkoci
Watcher of the Skies
Stanford and O'Brian
I just got done listening to the episode. I agree that Ray was intense at times. He was interesting even if he seemed to go off on tangents. Did Dave opt out of the discussion toward the end? I'll have to listen again to be sure.
I just got done listening to the episode. I agree that Ray was intense at times. He was interesting even if he seemed to go off on tangents. Did Dave opt out of the discussion toward the end? I'll have to listen again to be sure.
Stanford and O'Brian
Let's just say that we wanted to give Chris a chance to participate.
Tangent is Ray's middle name I think.
Let's just say that we wanted to give Chris a chance to participate.
Stanford and O'Brian
Ray is an intensely serious man. He hasn't done much media in recent years and (as you could tell) was raring to present a detailed rebuttal to the Bragalia fairy tale. He is very mercurial and talks fast when he gets on a roll—so do many of us—he's not used to a conversational format. Even though at times it might have sounded like he was off on a tangent, if you listen to his line of reasoning carefully, practically everything he said was very relevant to the question or point he was making and I think he presented a clear, detailed account of his involvement in the Soccoro case. IMO I think he is one of the only original non-military investigators to obtain hard, scientific evidence of UFO science and I urge you to read his amazing accounts of four noteworthy cases where his team was able to document w/ motion picture film, still pictures, audio recordings, a recording magnetometer and gravimeter. Go HERE: CONCERNING PHYSICAL STUDIES OF ANOMALOUS AERIAL OBJECTS (AAOs) - Our Strange Planet and then tell me what you think of the man.
Ray is an intensely serious man. He hasn't done much media in recent years and (as you could tell) was raring to present a detailed rebuttal to the Bragalia fairy tale. He is very mercurial and talks fast when he gets on a roll—so do many of us—he's not used to a conversational format. Even though at times it might have sounded like he was off on a tangent, if you listen to his line of reasoning carefully, practically everything he said was very relevant to the question or point he was making and I think he presented a clear, detailed account of his involvement in the Soccoro case. IMO I think he is one of the only original non-military investigators to obtain hard, scientific evidence of UFO science and I urge you to read his amazing accounts of four noteworthy cases where his team was able to document w/ motion picture film, still pictures, audio recordings, a recording magnetometer and gravimeter. Go HERE: CONCERNING PHYSICAL STUDIES OF ANOMALOUS AERIAL OBJECTS (AAOs) - Our Strange Planet and then tell me what you think of the man.
Apocalypto
Paranormal Maven
Stanford and O'Brian
Hi Chris,
I think the combination of Stanford and Biedny was a bit much there. They can both be a bit too sensitive at times.
But I did find Ray a bit much in that interview, to be honest - both in terms of his verbal marathon and his unwillingness to engage in conversation as opposed to over-explaining lecture.
I have my doubts about his temperament and self-control. If he has that much trouble keeping his head in a 2 hour interview, I tend to place a bit more skepticism on his ability to stay cool during the process of vetting a serious UFO case like this.
Also, I couldn't help but notice your extremely strong words toward the end of the interview in support of Mr Stanford's work. Don't get me wrong, I admire and respect your loyalty in standing up for him, but that does tend to just provoke more scrutiny on the man and his story.
I find this case interesting, and, although I've read about the case and seen documentaries on it, I haven't yet read Ray's book. Bear with me as I play advocate of the devil. I'd be very curious about your thoughts on this review of "Socorro "Saucer" in a Pentagon Pantry" I found on Amazon.
I'll read over the link you posted. Thanks very much for that.
Thanks very much,
Apocalypto
Hi Chris,
I think the combination of Stanford and Biedny was a bit much there. They can both be a bit too sensitive at times.
But I did find Ray a bit much in that interview, to be honest - both in terms of his verbal marathon and his unwillingness to engage in conversation as opposed to over-explaining lecture.
I have my doubts about his temperament and self-control. If he has that much trouble keeping his head in a 2 hour interview, I tend to place a bit more skepticism on his ability to stay cool during the process of vetting a serious UFO case like this.
Also, I couldn't help but notice your extremely strong words toward the end of the interview in support of Mr Stanford's work. Don't get me wrong, I admire and respect your loyalty in standing up for him, but that does tend to just provoke more scrutiny on the man and his story.
I find this case interesting, and, although I've read about the case and seen documentaries on it, I haven't yet read Ray's book. Bear with me as I play advocate of the devil. I'd be very curious about your thoughts on this review of "Socorro "Saucer" in a Pentagon Pantry" I found on Amazon.
I'll read over the link you posted. Thanks very much for that.
Thanks very much,
Apocalypto
Kieran
Paranormal Adept
Stanford and O'Brian
My gut feeling is telling me, that this could be an experimental human project, and maybe not an alien craft.The descriptions of the craft and the noise, and other details of the story, lead me to that conclusion.To be honest, i not sure, because i was not there, and most people are convinced that this was a craft of Alien design.So at the end of the day, it only my opinion.
My gut feeling is telling me, that this could be an experimental human project, and maybe not an alien craft.The descriptions of the craft and the noise, and other details of the story, lead me to that conclusion.To be honest, i not sure, because i was not there, and most people are convinced that this was a craft of Alien design.So at the end of the day, it only my opinion.
Stanford and O'Brian
You misread his enthusiasm as insistence. Since Bragalia is basing his whole premise on Colgate's claim that the event was a hoax, the true nature of his character is very relevant and important. Ray was simply allowing the facts about Colgate to define the man. Suggesting that the students set-up their own bordello and posing a "playmate" for photographs next to a 100' chimney he called "Paul Bunyon's condom" do show Colgate painting a rather negative picture of himself. Ray was simply pointing this out. Listen again to the show, he was careful to let the man's own actions define his own character.
You misread his enthusiasm as insistence. Since Bragalia is basing his whole premise on Colgate's claim that the event was a hoax, the true nature of his character is very relevant and important. Ray was simply allowing the facts about Colgate to define the man. Suggesting that the students set-up their own bordello and posing a "playmate" for photographs next to a 100' chimney he called "Paul Bunyon's condom" do show Colgate painting a rather negative picture of himself. Ray was simply pointing this out. Listen again to the show, he was careful to let the man's own actions define his own character.
Stanford and O'Brian
So there you go.
In fairness to both sides of the argument, that Dr. Colgate has engaged in pranks would only confirm that it takes one to know one. By the way, the latest update from Braglia indicates that Dr. Colgate says he is a friend of the perpetrator.
So there you go.
Stanford and O'Brian
Like I said, maybe Ray hasn't gotten out enough lately I've known the man for almost 8 years so I've had a lot of practice dealing with his mercurial personality. He likes to pontificate about things that he is sure of. So do I, for that matter. If you had any idea what he's accomplished in his life, you wouldn't question my admiration for the man and his work. They are putting in a permanent display of his baby dino tracks in the Smithsonian Natural History Museum—need I say more?
As far as the humanoid element, I agree, Ray thinks they were aliens. As many of you know, I don't buy into "aliens" and the ETH as a blanket explanation for UFOs. Since I wasn't there to investigate the case, I have to go with Ray and Hynek's investigation. Do I believe they were aliens? No. But I support Ray 100% even though I don't necessarily agree with his conclusion.
Like I said, maybe Ray hasn't gotten out enough lately
I've known the man for almost 8 years so I've had a lot of practice dealing with his mercurial personality. He likes to pontificate about things that he is sure of. So do I, for that matter. If you had any idea what he's accomplished in his life, you wouldn't question my admiration for the man and his work. They are putting in a permanent display of his baby dino tracks in the Smithsonian Natural History Museum—need I say more? As far as the humanoid element, I agree, Ray thinks they were aliens. As many of you know, I don't buy into "aliens" and the ETH as a blanket explanation for UFOs. Since I wasn't there to investigate the case, I have to go with Ray and Hynek's investigation. Do I believe they were aliens? No. But I support Ray 100% even though I don't necessarily agree with his conclusion.
Stanford and O'Brian
We'll see Gene. I suspect this is just a bunch of grandstanding.
We'll see Gene. I suspect this is just a bunch of grandstanding.
Stanford and O'Brian
Let's just say that I'm probing this claim to see what I can dig up.
Stanford and O'Brian
I wouldn't categorize his apparent actions as pranks, however his actions do indicate a questionable moral center. I think that was Stanford's point.
I wouldn't categorize his apparent actions as pranks, however his actions do indicate a questionable moral center. I think that was Stanford's point.
Stanford and O'Brian
The same could be said for perpetrating a hoax at the expense of a police officer who has better things to do with his time -- such as fighting crime, monitoring speed traps, etc.
skunkape
Paranormal Maven
I'm near the end of the episode now. Just thought I'd mention those flying "eggs" were present in the Texas sky up until at least the mid '90's. I've seen 3 of them, one white, two green. I know at least 3 other people who have seen them. One guy claims one was landed in his back yard when he was a kid. He said he couldn't wake his parents up to look at it and so he went and hid in his closet until morning. He showed me a patch in his yard where, decades later, the grass still grew yellowed.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
I'm sure Bragalia is leading up to something more. Perhaps if the case is a hoax, maybe something big like a name and method will be offered up. I can't say if the trickster cabal at NM TEch is a true one or not although it appears to be. But you can see that Bragalia has offered more this time around. And Colgate does seem to be this type of character probably involving himself in many shenanigans. We'll just have to keep up with the emerging stuff and still maintain an open mind.
One item Stanford offered up was the proximity of Zamora to the craft. He said within 55 feet and said it was probably closer than that. 50 feet is pretty close, but there seems to be some discrepency regarding this. Blue book says it was over 100. And Zamora himself puts the object at 200. Some say well over 200. I'm not sure the deal here.
Now as far as the hoax Colgate could be a liar, could be making this up, could be telling the truth, could be a complete jackass, or any number of other descriptors. But it doesn't negate the potential for a hoax. I'm just kind of taking all this in right now trying to process everything. But Stanford seemed to insist that this cannot be a hoax based on Colgate's apparently dubious integrity. While this could have some truth to it, it isn't the end all. He still could hold some rather big cards in the game. I just don't know right now. Interesting stuff.
One item Stanford offered up was the proximity of Zamora to the craft. He said within 55 feet and said it was probably closer than that. 50 feet is pretty close, but there seems to be some discrepency regarding this. Blue book says it was over 100. And Zamora himself puts the object at 200. Some say well over 200. I'm not sure the deal here.
Now as far as the hoax Colgate could be a liar, could be making this up, could be telling the truth, could be a complete jackass, or any number of other descriptors. But it doesn't negate the potential for a hoax. I'm just kind of taking all this in right now trying to process everything. But Stanford seemed to insist that this cannot be a hoax based on Colgate's apparently dubious integrity. While this could have some truth to it, it isn't the end all. He still could hold some rather big cards in the game. I just don't know right now. Interesting stuff.
I have no doubt that Stanford is one of the leading authorities on this case and I will not call into question his integrity or intent, but it all gets clouded in the emotion of the moment and makes him sound like a ranting maniac. Perhaps it is because of lack of exposure to media outlets, or that he is so obviously committed to this project, but if he were to turn it down a few notches, he would come off as more credible and rational. I don't think David said anything after Stanford threatened to hang up on the interview. Seemed to me that he thought it better to be quiet than to go off on the guy. Smart move.
Frank Warren
The UFO Chronicles
Greetings All,
I'm going to have to chime in on the side of Christopher!! I thought the show was excellent, regardless of the fact that it could have been called "The Ray Stanford Show."
As Christopher has said, to which I can confirm in corresponding with Ray prior to, and right up until the show began; to say he was eager and or enthusiastic to set the record straight re Socorro-would be putting it mildly!
Ray "talks the talk", but more importantly he "walks the walk!" He backs up what he says with scientific research, and indicates when he is speculating, and or theorizing.
I found his oration much like his book, full of factual information coming from the horse's mouth opposed to the hearsay that Tony is heralding.
Speaking of which it's important to point out that Tony has misinterpreted what Colgate has said so far, so his further allegations give me pause; for example in reference to the Pauling/Colgate letter he wrote:
I'm going to have to chime in on the side of Christopher!! I thought the show was excellent, regardless of the fact that it could have been called "The Ray Stanford Show."
As Christopher has said, to which I can confirm in corresponding with Ray prior to, and right up until the show began; to say he was eager and or enthusiastic to set the record straight re Socorro-would be putting it mildly!
Ray "talks the talk", but more importantly he "walks the walk!" He backs up what he says with scientific research, and indicates when he is speculating, and or theorizing.
I found his oration much like his book, full of factual information coming from the horse's mouth opposed to the hearsay that Tony is heralding.
Speaking of which it's important to point out that Tony has misinterpreted what Colgate has said so far, so his further allegations give me pause; for example in reference to the Pauling/Colgate letter he wrote:
The only thing he affirmed was he had an "indication!"
Later in the piece, Tony describes Colgate’s one liner as a “blunt reply”; another erroneous description (although it was short and sweet).
The dialogue Tony had with Colgate he (Tony) calls a confession:
was certainly not that! It was a reconfirmation of his mindset, and indicative of his lack of knowledge re the details of any alleged hoax.
My complaint with Tony is not the fact that he is looking into "a hoax" angle, as did the FBI, Army Intelligence, Air Force et al; it's the idea that he is making conclusive statements about it based on hearsay and no evidence, while at the same time ignoring the scientific evidence that's been on the table since 1964!
I not only applaud the show (thanks Gene & David for having Ray on) but offer additional praise for Ray's body of work, his scientific approach to the UFO enigma in general, and particularly with his efforts with the Socorro case!!
Now let's get Tony on!!
Cheers,
Frank
Later in the piece, Tony describes Colgate’s one liner as a “blunt reply”; another erroneous description (although it was short and sweet).
The dialogue Tony had with Colgate he (Tony) calls a confession:
was certainly not that! It was a reconfirmation of his mindset, and indicative of his lack of knowledge re the details of any alleged hoax.
My complaint with Tony is not the fact that he is looking into "a hoax" angle, as did the FBI, Army Intelligence, Air Force et al; it's the idea that he is making conclusive statements about it based on hearsay and no evidence, while at the same time ignoring the scientific evidence that's been on the table since 1964!
I not only applaud the show (thanks Gene & David for having Ray on) but offer additional praise for Ray's body of work, his scientific approach to the UFO enigma in general, and particularly with his efforts with the Socorro case!!
Now let's get Tony on!!
Cheers,
Frank