The unscience of extra-nonsense

[David Biedny]

Why don't you explain it to me then? I listened to the show but I must have missed the overwhelming evidence that convinced you.

The 'Michael Horn' reference is simply an attempt to draw your attention to the fact that your accepting fantastic claims from an individual who stands to profit from you beliving in them. David Sonnenschein was unable to answer or support several of his statements about Arigo's patients. How does he know Arrigo saw two million people? How does he know the success rate? How can you claim to know either?

Unless (of course) you're able to produce 1.4 million people who were healed by Arigo.

-DBTrek

So David Sonnenschein profits from the Arigo story how, exactly?

He's working on a film about Arigo, but aside from that, he's not selling anything relating to the case. He's not claiming to have the answers about that case, and he has been hesitant to go on any radio show and talk about his experiences. He saw what he saw, and I'll tell you, I've watched the documentary he did on Farias, and it's mind-blowing. You see the guy doing BRAIN SURGERY on a woman who is completely awake and without pain. Faith? A miracle? No, it's paranormal, and hence, fair game for The Paracast.

I've said it once, and I'll type it again: The truth of the Arigo story is well documented, for those who care to look, and this truth exists outside of your beliefs, DBTrek.

I saw another message from you questioning the veracity of my story about my Caracas UFO encounter. I understand your skepticism, but again, I'm not selling anything. You pay nothing to listen to The Paracast. I don't stand to benefit from sharing that story - indeed, I've paid a price to come forward with it - so what do I gain by making the claim? Is my brother lying as well? What does he stand to gain from going public with it?

dB

 

[DBTrek]

So David Sonnenschein profits from the Arigo story how, exactly?

He's working on a film about Arigo, but aside from that, he's not selling anything relating to the case.

The film is what I'm referring to.

I've said it once, and I'll type it again: The truth of the Arigo story is well documented, for those who care to look, and this truth exists outside of your beliefs, DBTrek.

Ok. I'll take a look for support of this "2-million patients cured with 70% success rate claim". If it is indeed well documented I should have no problem finding evidence for it.

I saw another message from you questioning the veracity of my story about my Caracas UFO encounter. I understand your skepticism, but again, I'm not selling anything. You pay nothing to listen to The Paracast. I don't stand to benefit from sharing that story - indeed, I've paid a price to come forward with it - so what do I gain by making the claim? Is my brother lying as well? What does he stand to gain from going public with it?

I question the extraterrestrial origins of the object you saw. Aliens seem to use suspiciously human-esque means of conveying themselves around the universe. I fail to see why a claim like yours seems reasonable to the UFO community but a claim of contact being initiated through consciousness, the sub-conscious, or lucid dreaming is seen as laughable.

It's counter-intuitive, this belief that aliens are are zipping around the universe in large physical vehicles. It's an inefficient, problematic, time-consuming way to make contact (their completley assumed god-like science aside). It makes no sense.

On the other hand . . . at what speed do dreams travel? At what speed does thought take place? What are the boundaries of these abilities?

There seems to be a lot more wiggle room in this area than the area of interstellar travel. I find the idea of non-physical contact less fantastic than the idea of a bunch of aliens wasting unkown amounts of time, energy, and resources so they can make a brief appearance, then vanish without a trace.

-DBTrek

 

[pixelsmith]

i may never tell anyone of any further sightings in the future. i received nothing but "yeah riiiight" from friends AND family.

 

[musictomyears]

i may never tell anyone of any further sightings in the future. i received nothing but "yeah riiiight" from friends AND family.

It's just great, isn't it. So we are lucky to have a forum for paranormal and UFO topics, but some posters just love poking fun at things they obviously know little to nothing about. "Don't bother me with the facts, I've made up my mind already".

How about giving everyone who posts here the benefit of the doubt, before spouting off? How about doing a minimum of research before trashing someone's views? How about disagreeing if necessary, but without questioning someone's integrity or sanity?

There are thousands of sites and forums on the net, which will squash the subjects we are talking about, without further consideration. I don't quite understand why that should happen here as well.

 

[David Biedny]

musictomyears,

I generally agree with your sentiments, even though it seems that everyone has their own preconceived notions about these topics. Pixelsmith, I totally understand and relate to your statement, look at what my disclosures have done for my life. Nada.

Now, not to sound harsh or anything, but DBTrek, I sometimes wonder about your sense of logic. I never claimed that what I saw in Caracas was of extraterrestrial origin, I stated clearly in the episode that I did not think it was current human technology. That's what I said, and that obviously leaves a lot of possibilities. You seem to grab onto what you "think" you heard, and run with it, even though it has precious little to do with actual statements made by myself and others. If you actually _listen_ to the show with any regularity, you know that I have serious issues with the ET theory as the one-stop-shop answer to UFO sightings. I have reasons to think that the reality is vastly more complicated than that single explanation.

If you plan on doing your research regarding the Arigo case on the Internet, I hope you will be doing searches in Portuguese, and also realize that the bulk of human knowledge has not made it to the net yet. Read the Fuller book.

If you are going to equate personal testimony of a physical manifestation with the addition of many witnesses, to the lucid dreams of a single person, your logic is seriously flawed.

It's counter-intuitive, this belief that aliens are are zipping around the universe in large physical vehicles. It's an inefficient, problematic, time-consuming way to make contact (their completley assumed god-like science aside). It makes no sense.

Why do you assume that these things want to make contact with us? Most of the credible evidence suggests otherwise. Large physical ships make no sense for potential interstellar travel? Well, what do you think makes sense for such a task?

dB

 

[Recon]

Hi everyone,

Not sure if I have ever introduced myself here before, but anyway, let me just dive right in. I really like the Paracast, but this epidsode was excrutiating!

Why was Julien on this show?? In my opinion, people like Julien offer stories only slightly better than the "Wild Card" line on Coast to Coast.

Brian

LOL, the wild card line... I could only listen to one show of that HOT GARBAGE, I have never made that mistake again. That is when the mentally ill get access to the phone lines, and spew then crap... There is a difference though, I think most of those callers believe what they say, which is even scarier.

 

[CapnG]

If you plan on doing your research regarding the Arigo case on the Internet, I hope you will be doing searches in Portuguese, and also realize that the bulk of human knowledge has not made it to the net yet. Read the Fuller book.

What he's saying is that if evidence does not exist in a readily available format, in a language he speaks then evidence doesn't exist.

Now, let's all stop for a moment and think about just how many other languages there are... and how many regional dialects...

 

[Nekrinos]

Hey, at least they listened to you. I haven't even been able to discuss paranormal topics anywhere but the few internet forums. If I say even one word to people, they either tune me out or slam the door in my face. It's completely sad how people don't even aknowlege paranormal as an approachable topic, when it's everywhere around them. Deep down, I think everyone has at least a little interest in the subject, they just don't want to admit it.

 

[Recon]

Neal Adams was a weird dude....
g
ene and david, how did you guys manage holding yourselve back when he would ask these supposid rhetorical question after rhetorical question... I was waiting for you guys to tell him to STFU and continue on with his answers.

 

[DBTrek]

Wow, lots of hyper-sensitive reactions to respond to.

i may never tell anyone of any further sightings in the future. i received nothing but "yeah riiiight" from friends AND family.

And your sharing this why?

No for attention surely.

How about giving everyone who posts here the benefit of the doubt, before spouting off? How about doing a minimum of research before trashing someone's views? How about disagreeing if necessary, but without questioning someone's integrity or sanity?

I don't believe I questioned anyone's sanity or integrity. I have done a "minimum of research" (if not more) on the topics I'm addressing. Why aren't you extending me the benefit of the doubt you seem to believe we all deserve?

I've looked in to your claims and found nothing supporting them. I'm open to being proven wrong, show me the info.

If you plan on doing your research regarding the Arigo case on the Internet, I hope you will be doing searches in Portuguese, and also realize that the bulk of human knowledge has not made it to the net yet. Read the Fuller book.

Unfortunately I don't speak Portuguese, so I will not be researching in that language or any others that I do not speak. I realize that the bulk of human knowledge has not made it to the internet. I suspect you already realize that running the search terms 'Jose Arigo', 'Arigo 2 million', 'Arigo 70%', 'Arigo 70 percent', 'Arigo Two Million' through Google fails to produce anything confirming the claims.

Sure, it's possible that books in Portuguese may say that Arigo saw 2 million patients and cured with a 70% success rate. However, since there are English sites about Jose Arigo is it not strange that none of the one's I found mentioned either of those 'facts'? Why would an English speaking fan of Jose Arigo overlook such astounding accomplishments of the man?

The closest I could find was this snippet from http://psychic-abilities.suite101.com/article.cfm/psychic_surgery (an un-cited web page):

"Arigo saw up to 1,500 patients each day"

That's a little different from the guest's claim that "Five days a week" Arigo saw between "500 and 1000 people". It's a subtle difference in language but the result could be an over-count of 499 patients per day for ten years. That's a margin of error equalling 1.29 million people. Dios Mio!

If you are going to equate personal testimony of a physical manifestation with the addition of many witnesses, to the lucid dreams of a single person, your logic is seriously flawed.

I'm not equating anything except the two competing ideas of alien contact.

One requires us to believe that a civilization of advanced aliens co-exist with us in time, they mysteriously "know" that there's life on earth, they have the means to create mind-boggling interstellar vehicles, and they choose to fly themselves in these vehicles to planet Earth. After this long journey, of course, they depart Earth leaving behind only eyewitness testimony and dubious photos/videos.

The other method of alien contact is also strange but it doesn't require the manfufacture of super space cars, the suspension of known physics, or the unfathomable urge of these beings to travel mind-blowing distances simply to be seen by humans.

It still requires some fantastic technology; namely a mind-contacting device that can span vast distances and overcome language barriers. Still, is that really any less believable than the super flying space car theory?

What he's saying is that if evidence does not exist in a readily available format, in a language he speaks then evidence doesn't exist.

Weeeeeeeeeak. Beat on that straw man! Get him! Get him!

-DBTrek

 

[musictomyears]

DBTrek, it is obvious that you don't partake in this discussion in order to learn something about Arigo, or anything else for that matter, but to lecture on what *you* think is right, and what *you* think is wrong, irrespective of anyone else's research or efforts. You wilfully distort the truth, in order to further your pointless argument. For example, you say that "I've looked in to your claims and found nothing supporting them." For your benefit, let me repeat my "claims", in case you have forgotten:

"Do you really think that thousands of people would have turned up at his clinic, every day for twenty years, if his success rate wouldn't have been extraordinarily favourable? Do you think sick people just love wasting time? His success rate was around 70%, including cancers and other "incurable" conditions."

Every one of the statements I made is fact. If you don't want to believe the hundreds of personal and newspaper testimonies, or the presenters at the Paracast, then it is up to you to prove them wrong - that's all there is to it. If you would have listened to the show, you would have heard David Sonnenschein say at 01:23:32 that he was told by people who knew Arigo about an *estimated* success rate of 70%.

If you knew anything at all about the subject of spiritual healing, you would know that a) it is a blessing for humanity that there are genuine healers around, and b) sick people only flock by their tens of thousands when they can expect to receive dramatic cures. The fact that Arigo, like others, didn't charge for his services, is only a minor aspect.

It is entirely irrelevant to the debate, whether or not Arigo helped one million, or two million people, or whether his success rate was 50, 70 or 90%. What matters is that very sick people were helped, free of charge - a circumstance you don't seem to grasp.

 

[cottonzway]

I have to admit I didn't understand Mr. Julien in what he was saying in both his accent or what he was trying to say in general. It sounded like he was talking about subjects I don't know nearly enough about to have an educated opinion on. In order for me to give an honest review of someone I have to at least understand what they are trying to say.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I have to admit I didn't understand Mr. Julien in what he was saying in both his accent or what he was trying to say in general. It sounded like he was talking about subjects I don't know nearly enough about to have an educated opinion on. In order for me to give an honest review of someone I have to at least understand what they are trying to say.

My concern is that he may not know either

 

[DBTrek]

DBTrek, it is obvious that you don't partake in this discussion in order to learn something about Arigo, or anything else for that matter, but to lecture on what *you* think is right, and what *you* think is wrong, irrespective of anyone else's research or efforts.

Actually, i joined this thread to talk about time (including fractal time) and during that I poked fun at recent guests including the one talking about Arigo. I'm not 'lecturing' anyone since all of you have the option of reading or ignoring anything I write.

Every one of the statements I made is fact. If you don't want to believe the hundreds of personal and newspaper testimonies, or the presenters at the Paracast, then it is up to you to prove them wrong - that's all there is to it.

So . . . if you make a claim that I question the onus is on me to prove you wrong? I disagree. Especially since you could easily make a false or unverifiable claim and it would be impossible for me to prove it wrong. For instance, you could say "The grey aliens like chicken soup but the reptillians don't, and that's a fact!"

How am I supposed to disprove that?

I'm afraid the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim, not the one questioning it.

If you would have listened to the show, you would have heard David Sonnenschein say at 01:23:32 that he was told by people who knew Arigo about an *estimated* success rate of 70%.

Thank you for pointing that out. I listened to the episode twice and both times that number escaped my notice though I remember the part right before that where Sonnenschein says he "doesn't know" how many people didn't get healed. I re-listened to that part of the interview and Sonnenschein doesn't sound like he's presenting a fact. He sounds like he's sort of scrambling for some number and eventually comes up with something that 'others' have told him.

It is entirely irrelevant to the debate, whether or not Arigo helped one million, or two million people, or whether his success rate was 50, 70 or 90%. What matters is that very sick people were helped, free of charge - a circumstance you don't seem to grasp.

I grasp the concept just fine, and I disagree with your view that the specifics of a case don't matter.

-DBTrek

 

[cottonzway]

My concern is that he may not know either

LOL

I think you may be right, Gene.

 

[CapnG]

What he's saying is that if evidence does not exist in a readily available format, in a language he speaks then evidence doesn't exist.

Weeeeeeeeeak. Beat on that straw man! Get him! Get him!

Sorry but no, that IS what you're saying. You haven't seen proof therefore there is none? WTF kind of reasoning is that? I mean I don't buy this Arigo guy either but I simply haven't seen the evidence either way, so I have to let it go for now.

 

[DBTrek]

Sorry but no, that IS what you're saying. You haven't seen proof therefore there is none? WTF kind of reasoning is that?

Reasoning that you've invented and attributed to me. I've said the opposite, stating that I'm open to being wrong and concceding that major resources aren't online.

I mean I don't buy this Arigo guy either but I simply haven't seen the evidence either way, so I have to let it go for now.

I'm pretty indifferent toward Arigo. I just find it interesting that his success rate is apparently unknown (according to the recent guest as well as the resources I can find in English) yet he is revered for being a great healer.

How great of a healer?

No one knows . . . but don't ask . . . just accept his greatness.

-DBTrek

 

[Ankhes]

So David Sonnenschein profits from the Arigo story how, exactly?

He's working on a film about Arigo, but aside from that, he's not selling anything relating to the case. He's not claiming to have the answers about that case, and he has been hesitant to go on any radio show and talk about his experiences. He saw what he saw, and I'll tell you, I've watched the documentary he did on Farias, and it's mind-blowing. You see the guy doing BRAIN SURGERY on a woman who is completely awake and without pain. Faith? A miracle? No, it's paranormal, and hence, fair game for The Paracast.

I've said it once, and I'll type it again: The truth of the Arigo story is well documented, for those who care to look, and this truth exists outside of your beliefs, DBTrek.

I saw another message from you questioning the veracity of my story about my Caracas UFO encounter. I understand your skepticism, but again, I'm not selling anything. You pay nothing to listen to The Paracast. I don't stand to benefit from sharing that story - indeed, I've paid a price to come forward with it - so what do I gain by making the claim? Is my brother lying as well? What does he stand to gain from going public with it?

dB

Maybe I shouldn't say anything here, but David, are you saying that just because a person may truly believe something, or has no gain from saying something, makes what that person says automatically true?
Really, I mean no disrespect here, and Arigo may have been on the level, but I can't see how just because someone doesn't stand to profit or isn't lying automatically validates an event. Does that mean all the people who truly believe they saw bigfoot, for example, and have nothing to gain by saying so, are automatically correct? Please don't horsewhip me for asking! I just want to understand you here.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Maybe I shouldn't say anything here, but David, are you saying that just because a person may truly believe something, or has no gain from saying something, makes what that person says automatically true?
Really, I mean no disrespect here, and Arigo may have been on the level, but I can't see how just because someone doesn't stand to profit or isn't lying automatically validates an event. Does that mean all the people who truly believe they saw bigfoot, for example, and have nothing to gain by saying so, are automatically correct? Please don't horsewhip me for asking! I just want to understand you here.

A person's testimony where they have nothing to gain has more weight than someone who does have something to gain. Not proof, but better evidence or testimony in a qualitative sense.

 

[musictomyears]

OK, here is the deal:

Arigo is one of the most famous, and best documented healers and spiritualist mediums ever, and he was so, long before this Paracast episode (which was excellent, IMHO). It is perhaps understandable that there are some who hadn't come across Arigo before. It indicates to me that they have done little to no research about the paranormal. If they had, they inevitably would have come across his name.

It is one thing to be ignorant. We all are, to some degree, and I would have thought that this forum also has an educational dimension. I personally come here to learn and to share knowledge. However, it is quite another to arrogantly, repetitively, stubbornly, if not pig-headedly, repeat, over and over again, one's ill-informed and factually wrong views. I don't understand why it should be so difficult to either say nothing, or, at least, find a few facts for backing up one's views.