• 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!

The Perfect Balance...The Lance Moody Interview

Forums New posts
Muadib, I'm not in any way shape or form stating that the unexplained mysteries are the result of ghosts, ufos and mythical one eyed creatures. To put your hands in the air when you don't have an answer that fits in you square hole universe is a cop out?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
dr.abbadon said:
Muadib, I'm not in any way shape or form stating that the unexplained mysteries are the result of ghosts, ufos and mythical one eyed creatures. To put your hands in the air when you don't have an answer that fits in you square hole universe is a cop out?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you get the idea that I accused you of "copping out" it's certainly not in my post. In fact, most of that post wasn't directed to you personally, just me making general observations about the things that I see going on in the field, the only part that was directed to you is the part where I mentioned you and the beginning where I said I disagreed with you. I think when a case is truly unexplained the most honest thing we can do is put our hands in the air and say that we don't know, then continue searching for evidence or whatever it is that's going to help us solve the case, if indeed it can be solved. I think some skeptics put out bad theories on cases simply because they don't want to be seen as not being able to explain something. The reason they do that is whenever a true believer hears that the skeptics can't explain a case or an aspect of a case, they seem to take it as confirmation of their own personal theory, this happens in a lot of fields whether it be paranormal or conspiracy theories. That was my point and it certainly wasn't directed at you.
 
Although some so called skeptics can apply a certain amount of bias in their dissemination, they do have “belief systems” nonetheless, and should properly present the difference when writing.

In the case of Lance and his “beliefs” versus his investigatory conclusions within any subject matter, I have never felt that he’s been this type of over zealous cynic.

Lance’s various discussions on this forum have dealt with paranormal activity, which is in and of itself, a justified and self explained definition to the title….Defined as, “of or pertaining to the claimed occurrence of an event or perception without scientific explanation, as psychokinesis, extrasensory perception, or other purportedly supernatural phenomena.”

His task as I see it is to explain the logical to the illogical, and more time than not he bumps heads with those almost instantly ready to jump on the bandwagon and go father than the, “it’s an unidentified flying object” which instead HAS TO BE an alien from an extra terrestrial planet, instead of simply being…..a U.F.O. or explained anomaly.

Lance, in my book, is one of the best skeptics we have in the field out there today. He keeps it real and be damned those who attempt to fool us with fakery!

Lastly, although he might not always write down his opinions in the most gentile or coddling of methods (someone say, “quaint”), he will go that extra step to defend his words, and if you take the time out to read what he has to say, you will notice that the complete package is fair, honest and forthright to those who are willing to listen or read.
 
PararealitySaint said:
Although some so called skeptics can apply a certain amount of bias in their dissemination, they do have “belief systems” nonetheless, and should properly present the difference when writing.

In the case of Lance and his “beliefs” versus his investigatory conclusions within any subject matter, I have never felt that he’s been this type of over zealous cynic.

Lance’s various discussions on this forum have dealt with paranormal activity, which is in and of itself, a justified and self explained definition to the title….Defined as, “of or pertaining to the claimed occurrence of an event or perception without scientific explanation, as psychokinesis, extrasensory perception, or other purportedly supernatural phenomena.”

His task as I see it is to explain the logical to the illogical, and more time than not he bumps heads with those almost instantly ready to jump on the bandwagon and go father than the, “it’s an unidentified flying object” which instead HAS TO BE an alien from an extra terrestrial planet, instead of simply being…..a U.F.O. or explained anomaly.

Lance, in my book, is one of the best skeptics we have in the field out there today. He keeps it real and be damned those who attempt to fool us with fakery!

Lastly, although he might not always write down his opinions in the most gentile or coddling of methods (someone say, “quaint”), he will go that extra step to defend his words, and if you take the time out to read what he has to say, you will notice that the complete package is fair, honest and forthright to those who are willing to listen or read.
Click to expand...

The above has not always been my experience. I tend to think there is some misdirected potential there. But toward the end of 2012 I noticed a subtle change for the better, and I hope the trend continues in 2013.
 
lancemoody said:
Pixelsmith speaks with same conviction he had when he proclaimed that he had proven that Obama's birth certificate was fake.

In actuality Pixel had simply misunderstood how modern day scanners work (or more precisely he accepted the word of some dumbass on YouTube who didn't understand how scanners work).

As far as 9/11 Truthers, it's hard to overstate the stupidty of these guys.

Lance
Click to expand...
As I recall I questioned it and immediately tried scanning a document myself and discovered scanners do indeed behave that way. As I recall I retracted any sort of "proclamation". Please correct me if I am wrong.
As far as 9/11 Liars, it's hard to overstate the stupidity of these guys.
 
ufology said:
The above has not always been my experience. I tend to think there is some misdirected potential there. But toward the end of 2012 I noticed a subtle change for the better, and I hope the trend continues in 2013.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it was because of a change in your perceptions and nothing Lance did...but I am glad for you nonetheless.
 
Kieran said:
I've trouble believing Ray because this is the same guy who believes he communicated with Jesus ( a 2,000 year old character from the bible)
Should we just forget, he also claimed he had knowledge to build a time machine? Come on Chris, the guy obviously says stuff that isn't the truth and you should know better. If anyone else told you they were channeling Jesus ( what would you say?) Honestly just think about this and get back to me.
Click to expand...
Ray never claimed to channel Jesus or anyone else, to my knowledge... that was other people's interpretation of his connection to his own unconscious mind. And all this was back in the 60s and early 70s. Ray has gone on to more grounded, scientific pursuits. Don't believe everything you read on the internet--especially from people who have an ax to grind.
 
Chris any chance you can do a bit of Ray-needling and get a pic or too? We know his views on wishing his contribution to science to come before publishing all but maybe a little sneak preview would be nice.

I am an absolute sucker for good UFO pics and vids - there is too much crap out there to weed through as it is so if someone has some quality stuff, I for one, would love to see it sometime.
 
PararealitySaint said:
Perhaps it was because of a change in your perceptions and nothing Lance did...but I am glad for you nonetheless.
Click to expand...

I'm not clear on why you would be glad for me either way, but I am glad that the relationship between the Paracast and Lance appears to be much improved. I'm all in favor of building bridges with skeptics.
 
 
Christopher O'Brien said:
I'll ask... His latest 2 shots (daylight, 1 after another) from late last summer ago are really intriguing--possibly diagnostic. I'm itch'in to post them...
Click to expand...

Stanford doesn't have to make any specific claims about the evidence that would cost him his reputation. If he's actually concerned about his reputation, then withholding it all like this is already costing him. This issue is of relevance to us all as a species and therefore it goes beyond petty personal considerations of pride or fame or fortune. If the evidence he's got is really that good, then it should speak largely for itself and there is an ethical obligation to allow us access to it.
 
Perhaps there is another way to look at this Ufology. It is my impression that Ray is a <curmudgeon> and his attitude might be ... *It's my evidence! I won't release my evidence until I am good and damned ready!

At any rate, that is my impression. Jus' saying ...

Decker
 
During the time I had some role in solving the Socorro case, Stanford jumped back into it. Why not? He wrote an entire book about it, right? He was built up as some kind of top level researcher so I listened. Frankly, in writing and interviews he came across as seriously lacking. His insults towards Stirling Colgate, dismissive attitude towards Linus Pauling and cheap shots against Tony Bragalia were laughable. His behavior in interviews was childish. I've heard him since, and he has improved that which is all that ever really annoyed me. He's entitled to think what he wants, present his evidence whenever he wants. . . . . tick-tock . . . .
 
Decker said:
Perhaps there is another way to look at this Ufology. It is my impression that Ray is a <curmudgeon> and his attitude might be ... *It's my evidence! I won't release my evidence until I am good and damned ready! At any rate, that is my impression. Jus' saying ...
Decker
Click to expand...

That would at least be honest and understandable, frustrating but forgiveable. So what's the best way to lobby a curmudgeon? None of the standard fare ( dump trucks full of money, ethics, logic ) seem to apply ... does anyone have any dinosaur tracks we can trade? ;)
 
I wonder how lance would appoch this subject if he had seen the. Craft I had seen. I became intrested and driven for answers. Today I still wonder what the hell I seen. I still beleve it was a experamental plane BUT why woule the air force fly a top secret plane over madison WI? Great show!
 
vesvehighfolk said:
I wonder how lance would appoch this subject if he had seen the. Craft I had seen. I became intrested and driven for answers. Today I still wonder what the hell I seen. I still beleve it was a experamental plane BUT why woule the air force fly a top secret plane over madison WI? Great show!
Click to expand...

Skeptics deny the evidence of other people's senses and will even deny their own. In the end, a die-hard skeptic doubts everything. How far would Lance go? I don't know, but I suspect that a mother ship cruise would probably convince most skeptics of something ... like that they'd gone completely insane. Perhaps that's the real reason there's no disclosure. Not because the powers that be are afraid ordinary people couldn't handle the truth, but because all the skeptics heads would explode.
 
Back
Top