AnnetteMarie
Skilled Investigator
being crabby from lack of sleep - wouldn't that be an asset to 'angry human'??
-
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!
The direction of the show recently
- Thread starter mikepc
- Start date
being crabby from lack of sleep - wouldn't that be an asset to 'angry human'??
Gareth
Nothin' to see here
I agree with that. The original version of my post actually mentioned something like that, saying that I believe criticism is fine and telling the OP I just happened to disagree in this case.
I forgot to mention that when I re-wrote it.
Gareth
Nothin' to see here
methshin
Japans Underground Robot Army
I was going to buy a shirt and give it to Paola Harris but I decided against it. I need to meet her first and I should have one around just in case so he could donate to the cause. I hear she will be at an event that I will at in August.
aNorthernSoul
Professional Breather
Hm, I kind of guess that sometimes calling guests out on people they mention, as well as the post interview discussion on the credibility of the guests can kind of blur in with the discussions about people in the field. It could provide the impression that much of the show is more about the UFO community than the phenomenon itself. Not saying it's wrong by any means, just a reasonable explanation as to why some listeners may feel this way.
Schuyler
Misanthrope
I think Gareth pretty well put this thing to rest by using the actual shows to prove the claim was not true. If you can back your assertion with data, great, but of the data proves the opposite of what you are claiming, oops! It's an awfully tenuous distinction in the first place, difficult to separate out (in my opinion, with this faulty brain, anyway).
I kind of like the post-interview wrap up, but I haven't heard it much lately. The show moves so fast that it seems like there is rarely time for it.
OK, Gareth. Go ahead and prove me wrong now. (sigh!)
I kind of like the post-interview wrap up, but I haven't heard it much lately. The show moves so fast that it seems like there is rarely time for it.
OK, Gareth. Go ahead and prove me wrong now. (sigh!)
David Biedny
Paranormal Adept
The post-show wraps are quite rare these days. If folks are working their way through the backlog of FREE episodes, it's likely that they're referring to the earlier episodes. If not, well, whatever. I'm at the point where I can't really care, we'll do the shows we want to do, and people can listen or not.
dB
dB
I still like the show wrapup when ya do one. I enjoy the back and forth anaysis of our host pertaining to the last guest. But if ya don't do it I'll still listen if I'm interested in the show. 8)
grannysmith
Skilled Investigator
But why ask for people's opinions then? You have fallen into the trap of gathering a couple of sycophants around you who may not represent general listener opinion. Fine, but don't ask for genuinely held opinion, then
I think OP has a point in the sense that you judge guests by the people you both - interviewer and interviewee - don't give credence to and this makes guest credibility, on the interviewer's part, a matter of their views about ufo 'personalities'.
CapnG
Devil's Advocate
The only recent trend in the show I can detect (if trend it can be called) is a heavy leaning towards UFO related paranormal subjects over other forms of phantasmagoria. But I don't really mind that and I don't think the rest of us do either.
I do miss the post-game commentaries of the older shows though. If you're holding a vote, I say bring 'em back!
I do miss the post-game commentaries of the older shows though. If you're holding a vote, I say bring 'em back!
David Biedny
Paranormal Adept
Well, you've got a point there, but if people say, "please stop doing so many shows about Chinese food", how should I respond?
dB
grannysmith
Skilled Investigator
Me too. Don't get me wrong, I luv the bitchin'.
: and it's still there throughout the show
grannysmith
Skilled Investigator
lol, fair enough, Dave but, as I said, I think that OP has a teensy weensy bit of a point about how you approach the credibility of your guests through how they react to certain ufo 'names'. This tends to make the focus of credibility of a guest how they do or do not give credence to other certain ufo 'personalities' in the same way that you do. It might be inevitable (as the shows have gone on your views about certain people have ... erm ... solidified) but ... it does kinda happen **hides**
.
Gareth
Nothin' to see here
Trying to decide if I was just called a sycophant, and if I should be insulted by that.
And yeah the post show wrap ups were great. I get the impression its hard to make time for them, but given a situation where a guest is straining the extremes of credulity, then Gene would knock it on its head 10mins early to allow for it.
It seems to have happened that way a few times.
And yeah the post show wrap ups were great. I get the impression its hard to make time for them, but given a situation where a guest is straining the extremes of credulity, then Gene would knock it on its head 10mins early to allow for it.
It seems to have happened that way a few times.
Schuyler
Misanthrope
grannysmith
Skilled Investigator
yeah, c'mon mate: you're one of the sycophants, obviously
Don't be so nasty to the 'others' :they ain't your enemy (necessarily)
Gareth
Nothin' to see here
yeah, c'mon mate: you're one of the sycophants, obviously
Again, I dont know if you're being serious or not. Lets define sycophant:
_______________
syc·o·phant<object style="margin: 1px;" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,0,0" width="13" height="21">
<embed src="http://img.tfd.com/m/sound.swf" flashvars="sound_src=http://img.tfd.com/hm/mp3/S0953700.mp3" menu="false" wmode="transparent" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" width="13" height="21"></object><script>play_w2("S0953700")</script>n. A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering influential people.
<hr class="hmshort" align="left">
- a self-seeking, servile flatterer; fawning parasite.
<hr class="hmshort" align="left">
- a person who tries to please someone in order to gain a personal advantage.
_______________
So that's me huh? Rather than expressing my disagreement with a criticism (while pointing out I don't have a problem with criticism), I am a self-seeking and servile parasite who flatters influential people in order to win favour to gain some sort of personal advantage?
Well, I guess the first step is acknowledgement that you have a problem. Today is a good day indeed.
(I'm trying really hard not to swear)
Actually, screw that. How the fuck was I nasty?
aNorthernSoul
Professional Breather
While we are throwing out opinions freely... I really like the post show discussion. I get that sometimes when the interviewee is speaking about things that need addressing you have to attack certain points during the interview. That being said, whenever possible I rather hear someone's theories as uninterrupted as possible knowing they will be thoroughly and aggressively addressed afterward. And if that interviewee has a substantial rebuttal, it could be addressed and given platform on a future episode.
Schuyler
Misanthrope
You should be pissed, Gareth. You're a voice of reason here.
Moderate forums, of which this is one, will always have difficulty. Moderates are not out to 'win' anything; they are out to consider, reflect, and attempt to approach (small-t) truth. Extremists, on the other hand, ARE out to 'win.' Indeed, that's their whole issue. The Paracast is in the middle.
If you go to a left-wing forum and express support for the 2nd amendment, you will banned in short order. Ask just where Obama's birth certificate is and you will be banned immediately. If you go to a right-wing forum and express support for gay marriage or abortion rights, you can also expect to be banned immediately. If you go to a conspiracy forum and express the opinion that 9/11 was what the commission said it was, that AIDS was NOT made by the CIA, or that the NWO is a figment of the imagination, you will be banned. Pure and simple. Opposite points of view do not survive under those circumstances. Even voices of moderation are shunned.
So when extremists visit this board, they immediately begin pushing for their agenda. They want all of us to know, really fast, TRUTH as they know it exists. Period. On the one side we have the Lance Moody types. These guys are Skeptics(tm), and they often call themselves 'Brights.' (Yeah, pretty strange). To them there is no God, no Jesus (whom you can't prove ever existed anyway), no UFOs, no paranormal. The Univerese is purely a mechanistic place for them and ANY deviation from this proves you have a weak mind. For them, there is no place to consider a spiritual side.
When the extreme Christians show up (not the moderate ones), they do the same thing. Unless you accept Jesus Christ as your personal Savior you are going to Hell. Unless you accept the FACT that the nephilim are driving flying saucers for Satan and that the mere mention of Jesus will make them scatter in a flutter, you are a heathen unworthy of conversion. Praise God. It's not enough to say, 'Yeah, I think there is a spiritual dimension to this issue.' It's either Jesus' way or the highway, period.
And we've got extremists in the middle of the UFO field, too. Horn is a good example. He'll fight to the death for Billy. Lear is quick to disparage anyone who doesn't agree there is a soul catcher on the Moon. Whether it is the Serpo crowd or the Drone advocates, they insist they have a handle on capital-R Reality. If you don't agree, it's time to attack.
Moderates, on the other hand are more likely to say there might be something to be gained by studying the Biblical passages that might indicate ufo activity, but on the other hand we should probably be wary of full-blown conspiracy theories with no appreciable evidence. That kind of position is unacceptable to extremists.
You'll notice that extremists usually don't fight each other. It's very rare to see a 'Bright' take on a 'Christian' on these forums (Apologies to the moderate Christians). They usually ignore each other and post on different threads. Moderates, however, those who are willing to consider and look at different facets of an issue, are always under attack, often under personal attack. So people like Garath, whom I have never seen utter an 'extremist' post, are labled as 'sycophants' because they support the show and its direction.
Look at what's happened here. Gareth went through show by show to see if there was a 'direction' the show was headed, toward talking more about the UFO field and its people rather than UFOs themselves. His conclusion? No. That is not supported by the evidence. Though there have been some shows that did do that, the overall direction of the show is not moving increasingly toward that. So, if you still think so, where's your evidence?
To my mind this is an almost mystical distinction anyway. As far as I know the Paracast continues to increase it's 'market share.' I don't have a great deal of evidence for this, but if you look at other shows and their accompanying forums and look at membership numbers, the Paracast is always higher. (ATS, for the record, is a Johnny-come-lately to the podcast world. They got big for other reasons.)
The Paracast has a particular slant on ths issues. It is what has made the show popular. It amazes me that people who listen for free would even suggest it change direction. Why change a winning combination? If you prefer tha hard-hitting investigative journalism of George Noory, by all means take your butt over there and listen in.
I certainly hope (and expect) our hosts to resist extremism and go where THEY think the show ought to go. After all, they are the ones paying the bills.
Moderate forums, of which this is one, will always have difficulty. Moderates are not out to 'win' anything; they are out to consider, reflect, and attempt to approach (small-t) truth. Extremists, on the other hand, ARE out to 'win.' Indeed, that's their whole issue. The Paracast is in the middle.
If you go to a left-wing forum and express support for the 2nd amendment, you will banned in short order. Ask just where Obama's birth certificate is and you will be banned immediately. If you go to a right-wing forum and express support for gay marriage or abortion rights, you can also expect to be banned immediately. If you go to a conspiracy forum and express the opinion that 9/11 was what the commission said it was, that AIDS was NOT made by the CIA, or that the NWO is a figment of the imagination, you will be banned. Pure and simple. Opposite points of view do not survive under those circumstances. Even voices of moderation are shunned.
So when extremists visit this board, they immediately begin pushing for their agenda. They want all of us to know, really fast, TRUTH as they know it exists. Period. On the one side we have the Lance Moody types. These guys are Skeptics(tm), and they often call themselves 'Brights.' (Yeah, pretty strange). To them there is no God, no Jesus (whom you can't prove ever existed anyway), no UFOs, no paranormal. The Univerese is purely a mechanistic place for them and ANY deviation from this proves you have a weak mind. For them, there is no place to consider a spiritual side.
When the extreme Christians show up (not the moderate ones), they do the same thing. Unless you accept Jesus Christ as your personal Savior you are going to Hell. Unless you accept the FACT that the nephilim are driving flying saucers for Satan and that the mere mention of Jesus will make them scatter in a flutter, you are a heathen unworthy of conversion. Praise God. It's not enough to say, 'Yeah, I think there is a spiritual dimension to this issue.' It's either Jesus' way or the highway, period.
And we've got extremists in the middle of the UFO field, too. Horn is a good example. He'll fight to the death for Billy. Lear is quick to disparage anyone who doesn't agree there is a soul catcher on the Moon. Whether it is the Serpo crowd or the Drone advocates, they insist they have a handle on capital-R Reality. If you don't agree, it's time to attack.
Moderates, on the other hand are more likely to say there might be something to be gained by studying the Biblical passages that might indicate ufo activity, but on the other hand we should probably be wary of full-blown conspiracy theories with no appreciable evidence. That kind of position is unacceptable to extremists.
You'll notice that extremists usually don't fight each other. It's very rare to see a 'Bright' take on a 'Christian' on these forums (Apologies to the moderate Christians). They usually ignore each other and post on different threads. Moderates, however, those who are willing to consider and look at different facets of an issue, are always under attack, often under personal attack. So people like Garath, whom I have never seen utter an 'extremist' post, are labled as 'sycophants' because they support the show and its direction.
Look at what's happened here. Gareth went through show by show to see if there was a 'direction' the show was headed, toward talking more about the UFO field and its people rather than UFOs themselves. His conclusion? No. That is not supported by the evidence. Though there have been some shows that did do that, the overall direction of the show is not moving increasingly toward that. So, if you still think so, where's your evidence?
To my mind this is an almost mystical distinction anyway. As far as I know the Paracast continues to increase it's 'market share.' I don't have a great deal of evidence for this, but if you look at other shows and their accompanying forums and look at membership numbers, the Paracast is always higher. (ATS, for the record, is a Johnny-come-lately to the podcast world. They got big for other reasons.)
The Paracast has a particular slant on ths issues. It is what has made the show popular. It amazes me that people who listen for free would even suggest it change direction. Why change a winning combination? If you prefer tha hard-hitting investigative journalism of George Noory, by all means take your butt over there and listen in.
I certainly hope (and expect) our hosts to resist extremism and go where THEY think the show ought to go. After all, they are the ones paying the bills.