• 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!

What is a Technologist?

Free episodes:

Forums New posts
Reading some of the comments from gadzometer made me laugh. Ignorance and ego is not something lost with this fella. One post you leave and don't reply. That shows me you have no character or backbone or maybe you just wanted to get your simple minded rant of your chest.

This show is free, it not a pay subscribe and then listen after payment show. I wonder why some people are of the believe the hosts are here to make money.

Those people have obviously never listened to the shows clearly, and are obviously not even aware of why David and Gene first started the show. Go and listen and after that, check over what you wrote here gadozmeter/ and say to yourself, was i honest in what i wrote.

To be honest, if they do make money with the show, so what/ is this harming you personally in some way, is it against your principles?

David and Gene have never asked for one dime of me in all the times' i have listened to the show. But if the time came and the survival of the show was at risk due to no revenue stream. I would put my hand in my pocket and help out.

Last thing Gadzometer , if you do like the hosts or the show there is plenty of other shows that would be more suited to your needs.
 
As you state, we don't do it for the money. There is very little money here. Thanks to ads and an occasional donation, we can cover some costs and dine in luxury at McDonalds from time to time.

But certainly we won't refuse a donation, particularly during the holidays.

If the show delivered an livable income, mind you, we wouldn't refuse. :)
 
To be honest Gadz...your post wasn't worthy of a reply nor of as much time/response that's been given. You've had your fifteen minutes, thus proving Warhol's premise.

Now GTFO, or stay and possibly learn something, share something worthwhile.
 
If you have a look at the replies to my post, you can see why I maintain my anonymity.

Though I must admit I didn't expect such a response. And to those of you who mentioned me talking about David and Gene's ego while tooting my own horn are correct. Maybe I have some ego issues of my own. :)

But what I said still stands.

Shows like Red Ice and C2C tend to sit back and listen to what the guest has to say. We do need a show that can dig a little deeper into the info and unroots the lies and misinformation. I guess that is what I was hoping for this show as the show slogan states. But to quote the guys on the show, sometimes the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater.

I guess the root of my problem is that I was hoping this show would display an open minded but questioning approach to the interview. But most of the time it ends up being about drilling the interviewee in a confrontational manner or driving them into an area where the interviewee's knowledge is less then that of the interviewer. Sort of like the way one dog tries to dominate another.

And BTW, I appreciate DB's diplomatic response. Why can't you do that in your interviews?

At the end of the day, all any of us want is the truth. And IMHO, the door has swung too far with you guys. Like you want to disprove people... even those who may be genuine.

Peace, Gadz
 
And Gene, why don't you guys put up a donation button and advertise that in the show?

I must admit I have a couple of web sites but they do not need to steam the amount of audio that you guys would so I have no idea how much the hosting would cost.

And do a bit more reading about the material of your guests. And have an upcoming guest list so that your audience can pose some questions. Maybe I just haven't found it.

But at the end of the day, you are right. It is your show, I don't have to subscribe and guests don't have to appear if they don't want to.

I guess you guys are the closest podcast I can find to something that investigates the paranormal/UFO stuff with a questioning mind. But it just has the problems that I mentioned in my first post.

Peace, Gadz
 
While I think it would be a bit too forward to ask for donations on the show, we do have a Donate button in the navigation bar on this forum. It's always been there. There's also one on the main site, The Paracast with Gene Steinberg and David Biedny -- The Gold Standard of Paranormal Radio, in the left sidebar, and we list the PayPal link in each issue of our newsletter. I don't want to make it seem as if we're begging for money, but we do try to make it clear that we won't refuse the cash.. :)

As to announcing guests in advance, one of the issues is that we often make those arrangements late in the game, so there isn't time. But certainly we hope to have a return visit from Richard Dolan in the near future, to talk about his latest book. There's also a new title from Nick Redfern about contactees that has promise, so we'll probably want to talk to him about it.
 
Gadzooks.

It appears from your original post that you are prepared to focus solely on the wanker bashing shows i.e Paola Harris etc. without even mentioning great shows like the Ted Phillips interview and others.

Not every interview was about tearing down the interviewee, let alone to satisfy either Gene or David's opinions or egos.
How about doing us a favor and listening to all the shows from the beginning (if you haven't already) and hearing some of the outstanding efforts that Gene & David have provided us before lambasting them about their egos and donation begging.Besides the fact that the people who frequent the forums and listen to the show are more than happy to donate.:)

Apart from this being fundamentally twisted by you it's down right rude and obnoxious!!!
You might be some big deal in your chosen profession or career but you mean nothing to us here on the forums.

Go and get yourself your own podcast if you're unsatisfied by the Paracast and let's hear how you do.
Let's see how much it costs you to keep it running and how you fare with people emailing and posting on your forum telling you how much better your show could run if you did it their way!!!:)
 
And another thing .... :D

David and Gene don't suffer fools lightly, but if we like a fool, they don't drop us off the edge just 'cause we're stoopit. They suffer us!
 
Theres something very fishy about that OP. Something just seems *off*.

I think its someones defence force. I want to know who this "researcher" is that the OP mentions. I think that would explain a lot.
 
Hello everyone, I just wanted to say that a bunch of people over-reacted early on to what appears to be a genuinely sincere posting with critical points but a debatable overall presentation.

"But most of the time it ends up being about drilling the interviewee in a confrontational manner or driving them into an area where the interviewee's knowledge is less then that of the interviewer."

While I disagree that that thing happens most of the time, I do have to agree that this does occur. It is rare for the "UFOlogy" researchers that constitute the bulk of the interviewees to have specific specialist knowledge of sciences beyond the "science" of what is essentially the paranormal. And when you tell them about determining parallax and one other image analysis term I couldn't make out as brought up in the James Carrion interview (to quote a recent example), you have the overall effect of dazzling the interviewee (and some listeners) beyond their scopes, and forcing them into unchallenging agreement. This is not ill-meaning, of course, but it achieves nothing.

Also, I'd like to repeat a sentence I generally agree with, which may have been ignored by some.

"Just because you can replicate something using photoshop, doesn't mean that the image HAS been done that way."
 
Men Around Screen said:
"Just because you can replicate something using photoshop, doesn't mean that the image HAS been done that way."
Click to expand...

I don't believe I've ever heard anyone claim otherwise, but it is an extremely weak argument. Replicating something in Photoshop means it COULD HAVE BEEN DONE that way. The issue comes up when some UFO aficionado claims that his favorite image "has never been replicated, therefore it MUST BE TRUE." When someone uses Photoshop and proves that it could have been done that way, the argument is defeated. Saying so is logically valid.

This is typical of the Billy Meier photographs, for example, when supports of Meier like to claim the photos have never been replicated. They have, many times, and they've also been shown to be complete fakes. It really depends on how you are using the argument.

Since the OP provides no context whatsoever for his claim, it is meaningless. It's a stand alone sentence. In fact, the OP provides no examples for anything he says. He says he knows for a fact that 'some researcher' has been mistreated, but neglects to give a name. It's just kind of a generalized rant with no specifics.
 
I'm not gonna beat up on this guy, as much as I want to. But frankly it gives me a chance to lodge a completely different kind of complaint. Honestly, I think Gene and David pay too much attention to the "listeners". We are notsubscribers. Gene and David are not obligated to give us anything. If you don't like the show, get another free podcast and listen to that one. It boggles the mind how people can complain about something they get for free. Same with the politics: I seldom find myself in agreement with either host politically. But so what? It's their show. If they want to talk about their political views the whole show, so be it. People that don't like it can go somewhere else. Frankly I am tired of the time they have to spend defending themselves from silly criticism such as this.
 
Back
Top