THE PARACAST NEWSLETTER
May 18, 2014
www.theparacast.com
UFO Investigator Ray Stanford Brings You Up to Date on Socorro, NM Case on The Paracast
The Paracast is heard Sundays from 3:00 AM until 6:00 AM Central Time on the GCN Radio Network and affiliates around the USA, the Boost Radio Network, the IRN Internet Radio Network, and online across the globe via download and on-demand streaming.
Why It's Important for You to Donate to The Paracast: Although ads help cover a small part of our expenses, the income they produce is never enough to pay your humble hosts decent wages. Also, we do not receive any revenue from the ads placed on the show by our network or local stations. So we hope you're able to help fill the gap, if you can, to help us cover increasing server costs and other expenses -- or perhaps provide a little extra cash for lunch and utility bills. No contribution is too small (or too large
. It’s easy to send a donation. We have a Donate link on our home page, below the logo and audio player. Or use the Donate link on our forums, at the bottom of the sidebar on the right. You can also send your PayPal donation direct to sales (at) theparacast (dot) com.
Attention U.S. Listeners: Help Us Bring The Paracast to Your City! In the summer of 2010, The Paracast joined the GCN radio network. This represented a huge step in bringing our show to a larger, mainstream audience. But we need your help to add additional affiliates to our growing network. Please ask one of your local talk stations if they are interested in carrying The Paracast. Feel free to contact us directly with the names of programming people we might be able to contact on your behalf. We can't do this alone, and if you succeed in convincing your local station to carry the show, we'll reward you with one of our special T-shirts, and other goodies. With your help, The Paracast can grow into one of the most popular paranormal shows on the planet!
Please Visit Our Online Store: You asked, and we answered. We are now taking orders for The Official Paracast T-Shirt and an expanded collection of other specially customized merchandise. To get your T-Shirt now featuring our brand new logo, just pay a visit to our online store at The Official Paracast Store to select your size and place your order. We also offer a complete lineup of other premium merchandise for your family, your friends and your business contacts.
About The Paracast: The Paracast covers a world beyond science, where UFOs, poltergeists and strange phenomena of all kinds have been reported by millions across the planet.
Set Up: The Paracast is a paranormal radio show that takes you on a journey to a world beyond science, where UFOs, poltergeists and strange phenomena of all kinds have been reported by millions. The Paracast seeks to shed light on the mysteries and complexities of our Universe and the secrets that surround us in our everyday lives.
Join long-time paranormal researcher Gene Steinberg, co-host and acclaimed field investigator Christopher O'Brien, and a panel of special guest experts and experiencers, as they explore the realms of the known and unknown. Listen each week to the great stories of the history of the paranormal field in the 20th and 21st centuries.
This Week's Episode: After over a two-year absence, long-time UFO investigator and amateur paleontologist Ray Stanford returns to The Paracast to talk about his storied nearly 60-year career in the field. Many of you are aware that Chris personally feels that Ray is probably the most important figure involved in UFO research. He'll discuss the 50-year anniversary of the Soccoro, NM UFO case, which is regarded as one of the most compelling classic sightings of all time. He'll also talk about many of the figures in the field that he has known since the early 1950s, and will give you an update on his ongoing research into the phenomenon.
Chris O’Brien’s Site: http://www.ourstrangeplanet.com
Reminder: Please don't forget to visit our famous Paracast Community Forums for the latest news/views/debates on all things paranormal: The Paracast Community Forums. We recently completed a major update that makes our community easier to navigate, and social network friendly.
Keeping Facts Close to the Vest
By Gene Steinberg
Several decades ago, controversial paranormal and sci-fi writer/editor Ray Palmer boasted of having a “fact.” It was, he said, information that allowed him to determine whether or not a UFO sighting was genuine. Later, he suggested it wasn’t one fact but several.
While being hammered by his readers over his refusal to reveal what his fact was all about, he claimed that, if he did so, he would make it possible for people to create fake UFO encounters, using that information to afford the veneer of credibility.
After several years of this back and forth debate, he seemed to be ready to relent, perhaps considering his legacy. He even seemed to have begun to reveal the details of his fact in his final writings, but he never quite got to the point of saying, “this is it!” before he died in 1977 after suffering from a series of strokes.
Yet many who followed Palmer’s writings believe that there never was a fact. some special bit of evidence to prove the existence of flying saucer. It was all a gimmick to generate controversy, and he worked hard to keep the mystery alive. Having known him slightly in the final years of his life, I have remained on the fence about the possible reality behind this fact. He told a good story, so let’s leave it at that.
But here in the UFO field, using some sort of fact may be a potential investigative tool. So abduction researchers may withhold some key tidbit that’s typical of such experiences. By doing so, they can see if that “X-factor” is present in new claims, and use it as a basis to determine whether the those claims are true. If they revealed this fact, they say, it would embolden some to fake abductions.
I’d prefer to know all the facts, put everything on the table. It doesn’t seem as if there are really many confirmed reports of fake abductions. You can argue that some of them — perhaps all of them — really have nothing whatever to do with UFOs or possible alien visitors. But that doesn’t mean these reports don’t reflect frightening experiences reported by honest people regardless of the cause.
It also appears that long-time UFO researcher Ray Stanford and others who investigated the 1964 Socorro, NM encounter may have withheld the details of the actual insignia, consisting of some unknown form of red lettering, which was seen on the unknown craft. That decision, evidently made by government investigators, which included Dr. J. Allen Hynek, would supposedly prevent others from creating fake sightings of craft sporting the very same insignia.
While I suppose that the details of that strange lettering could have been used to enhance the testimony the main witness, New Mexico police officer Lonnie Zamora, the risk of providing aid and comfort to hoaxers seems questionable at best. After all, just how many cases out there involve craft with some sort of visible insignia? In that, the Socorro case may be a rare breed indeed.
But you have to wonder just what important information may be withheld about a number of UFO cases for the very same reason, even if the logic behind the move is shaky.
It’s hard enough to find solid cases in a sea of reports of lights in the sky and other mundane phenomena. So why make the process of figuring out what’s going on more complicated by holding back one or more key evidence? Shouldn’t there be full disclosure?
Besides, even if that information is revealed on a restricted basis, in confidence, what guarantee is there that it won’t somehow leak out anyway? Someone once said that two people can only keep a secret if one of them is no longer alive. But I have qualms about this process. Does it possibly extend to more traditional scientific research? Do mainstream scientists routinely withhold key supporting evidence because they don’t want to have their work copied without credit, or faked? Don’t you wonder what might be going on here?
Now I don’t want to paint a paranoid picture about all this, and suggest that paranormal researchers are routinely holding back critical evidence as a means to protect themselves against possible fakers.
This doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea overall, although there has to be a balance. Most of the fakery you see, for example, in the UFO field consists of creating phony UFO photos and videos. It’s easy enough to do, and at least one YouTube channel we’ve mentioned on the show has made posting such garbage a profitable business. Certainly you want to see that sort of practice reduced (it will never end), but the best way to do that is not to visit those sites, even to expose the hoaxes. Hits are hits, and every one tallied only means more revenue to the purveyors of this sort of nonsense. So the best way to stop such things from happening is just to stay away.
Regardless, at some point in time, then, if enough cases have been accumulated and investigated to demonstrate the viability of using those alleged secret facts, everything should be put together and disclosed. You only need one genuine UFO abduction case to prove something strange is going on, and the same applies to UFO sightings.
Just one.
And if you have dozens, hundreds or thousands of such cases, you hope that researchers would not choose to horde the data in hopes, perhaps, of writing that best selling book that’ll make them rich and famous. That rarely happens for any literary endeavor. Instead, you’d like to think that all the information would be put out there, knowing that there may be the slight potential for fakery. You have to hope the investigators are savvy enough to separate the signal from the noise and not believe phony claims that may contain a few tidbits of information that seems authentic.
Besides, it also doesn’t mean someone can’t take a good guess and perhaps come up with the “X-factor” that is being used by abduction researchers as a guide to assess authenticity. If it’s so significant, wouldn’t it be something so obvious that its absence would also give clues as to what it’s all about?
I’m just wondering. I’ve been a journalist for over four decades, and I’ve never supported withholding anything, except information that might intrude on someone’s privacy rights, or the name of a confidential source. Let it all hang out, and let the chips fall.
Copyright 1999-2014 Making The Impossible, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy: Your personal information is safe with us. We will positively never give out your name and/or e-mail address to anybody else, and that's a promise!
May 18, 2014
www.theparacast.com
UFO Investigator Ray Stanford Brings You Up to Date on Socorro, NM Case on The Paracast
The Paracast is heard Sundays from 3:00 AM until 6:00 AM Central Time on the GCN Radio Network and affiliates around the USA, the Boost Radio Network, the IRN Internet Radio Network, and online across the globe via download and on-demand streaming.
Why It's Important for You to Donate to The Paracast: Although ads help cover a small part of our expenses, the income they produce is never enough to pay your humble hosts decent wages. Also, we do not receive any revenue from the ads placed on the show by our network or local stations. So we hope you're able to help fill the gap, if you can, to help us cover increasing server costs and other expenses -- or perhaps provide a little extra cash for lunch and utility bills. No contribution is too small (or too large
. It’s easy to send a donation. We have a Donate link on our home page, below the logo and audio player. Or use the Donate link on our forums, at the bottom of the sidebar on the right. You can also send your PayPal donation direct to sales (at) theparacast (dot) com.Attention U.S. Listeners: Help Us Bring The Paracast to Your City! In the summer of 2010, The Paracast joined the GCN radio network. This represented a huge step in bringing our show to a larger, mainstream audience. But we need your help to add additional affiliates to our growing network. Please ask one of your local talk stations if they are interested in carrying The Paracast. Feel free to contact us directly with the names of programming people we might be able to contact on your behalf. We can't do this alone, and if you succeed in convincing your local station to carry the show, we'll reward you with one of our special T-shirts, and other goodies. With your help, The Paracast can grow into one of the most popular paranormal shows on the planet!
Please Visit Our Online Store: You asked, and we answered. We are now taking orders for The Official Paracast T-Shirt and an expanded collection of other specially customized merchandise. To get your T-Shirt now featuring our brand new logo, just pay a visit to our online store at The Official Paracast Store to select your size and place your order. We also offer a complete lineup of other premium merchandise for your family, your friends and your business contacts.
About The Paracast: The Paracast covers a world beyond science, where UFOs, poltergeists and strange phenomena of all kinds have been reported by millions across the planet.
Set Up: The Paracast is a paranormal radio show that takes you on a journey to a world beyond science, where UFOs, poltergeists and strange phenomena of all kinds have been reported by millions. The Paracast seeks to shed light on the mysteries and complexities of our Universe and the secrets that surround us in our everyday lives.
Join long-time paranormal researcher Gene Steinberg, co-host and acclaimed field investigator Christopher O'Brien, and a panel of special guest experts and experiencers, as they explore the realms of the known and unknown. Listen each week to the great stories of the history of the paranormal field in the 20th and 21st centuries.
This Week's Episode: After over a two-year absence, long-time UFO investigator and amateur paleontologist Ray Stanford returns to The Paracast to talk about his storied nearly 60-year career in the field. Many of you are aware that Chris personally feels that Ray is probably the most important figure involved in UFO research. He'll discuss the 50-year anniversary of the Soccoro, NM UFO case, which is regarded as one of the most compelling classic sightings of all time. He'll also talk about many of the figures in the field that he has known since the early 1950s, and will give you an update on his ongoing research into the phenomenon.
Chris O’Brien’s Site: http://www.ourstrangeplanet.com
Reminder: Please don't forget to visit our famous Paracast Community Forums for the latest news/views/debates on all things paranormal: The Paracast Community Forums. We recently completed a major update that makes our community easier to navigate, and social network friendly.
Keeping Facts Close to the Vest
By Gene Steinberg
Several decades ago, controversial paranormal and sci-fi writer/editor Ray Palmer boasted of having a “fact.” It was, he said, information that allowed him to determine whether or not a UFO sighting was genuine. Later, he suggested it wasn’t one fact but several.
While being hammered by his readers over his refusal to reveal what his fact was all about, he claimed that, if he did so, he would make it possible for people to create fake UFO encounters, using that information to afford the veneer of credibility.
After several years of this back and forth debate, he seemed to be ready to relent, perhaps considering his legacy. He even seemed to have begun to reveal the details of his fact in his final writings, but he never quite got to the point of saying, “this is it!” before he died in 1977 after suffering from a series of strokes.
Yet many who followed Palmer’s writings believe that there never was a fact. some special bit of evidence to prove the existence of flying saucer. It was all a gimmick to generate controversy, and he worked hard to keep the mystery alive. Having known him slightly in the final years of his life, I have remained on the fence about the possible reality behind this fact. He told a good story, so let’s leave it at that.
But here in the UFO field, using some sort of fact may be a potential investigative tool. So abduction researchers may withhold some key tidbit that’s typical of such experiences. By doing so, they can see if that “X-factor” is present in new claims, and use it as a basis to determine whether the those claims are true. If they revealed this fact, they say, it would embolden some to fake abductions.
I’d prefer to know all the facts, put everything on the table. It doesn’t seem as if there are really many confirmed reports of fake abductions. You can argue that some of them — perhaps all of them — really have nothing whatever to do with UFOs or possible alien visitors. But that doesn’t mean these reports don’t reflect frightening experiences reported by honest people regardless of the cause.
It also appears that long-time UFO researcher Ray Stanford and others who investigated the 1964 Socorro, NM encounter may have withheld the details of the actual insignia, consisting of some unknown form of red lettering, which was seen on the unknown craft. That decision, evidently made by government investigators, which included Dr. J. Allen Hynek, would supposedly prevent others from creating fake sightings of craft sporting the very same insignia.
While I suppose that the details of that strange lettering could have been used to enhance the testimony the main witness, New Mexico police officer Lonnie Zamora, the risk of providing aid and comfort to hoaxers seems questionable at best. After all, just how many cases out there involve craft with some sort of visible insignia? In that, the Socorro case may be a rare breed indeed.
But you have to wonder just what important information may be withheld about a number of UFO cases for the very same reason, even if the logic behind the move is shaky.
It’s hard enough to find solid cases in a sea of reports of lights in the sky and other mundane phenomena. So why make the process of figuring out what’s going on more complicated by holding back one or more key evidence? Shouldn’t there be full disclosure?
Besides, even if that information is revealed on a restricted basis, in confidence, what guarantee is there that it won’t somehow leak out anyway? Someone once said that two people can only keep a secret if one of them is no longer alive. But I have qualms about this process. Does it possibly extend to more traditional scientific research? Do mainstream scientists routinely withhold key supporting evidence because they don’t want to have their work copied without credit, or faked? Don’t you wonder what might be going on here?
Now I don’t want to paint a paranoid picture about all this, and suggest that paranormal researchers are routinely holding back critical evidence as a means to protect themselves against possible fakers.
This doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea overall, although there has to be a balance. Most of the fakery you see, for example, in the UFO field consists of creating phony UFO photos and videos. It’s easy enough to do, and at least one YouTube channel we’ve mentioned on the show has made posting such garbage a profitable business. Certainly you want to see that sort of practice reduced (it will never end), but the best way to do that is not to visit those sites, even to expose the hoaxes. Hits are hits, and every one tallied only means more revenue to the purveyors of this sort of nonsense. So the best way to stop such things from happening is just to stay away.
Regardless, at some point in time, then, if enough cases have been accumulated and investigated to demonstrate the viability of using those alleged secret facts, everything should be put together and disclosed. You only need one genuine UFO abduction case to prove something strange is going on, and the same applies to UFO sightings.
Just one.
And if you have dozens, hundreds or thousands of such cases, you hope that researchers would not choose to horde the data in hopes, perhaps, of writing that best selling book that’ll make them rich and famous. That rarely happens for any literary endeavor. Instead, you’d like to think that all the information would be put out there, knowing that there may be the slight potential for fakery. You have to hope the investigators are savvy enough to separate the signal from the noise and not believe phony claims that may contain a few tidbits of information that seems authentic.
Besides, it also doesn’t mean someone can’t take a good guess and perhaps come up with the “X-factor” that is being used by abduction researchers as a guide to assess authenticity. If it’s so significant, wouldn’t it be something so obvious that its absence would also give clues as to what it’s all about?
I’m just wondering. I’ve been a journalist for over four decades, and I’ve never supported withholding anything, except information that might intrude on someone’s privacy rights, or the name of a confidential source. Let it all hang out, and let the chips fall.
Copyright 1999-2014 Making The Impossible, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy: Your personal information is safe with us. We will positively never give out your name and/or e-mail address to anybody else, and that's a promise!