THE PARACAST NEWSLETTER
May 8, 2016
www.theparacast.com
Explore Orange Fireballs and Other Amazing Mysteries 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.
SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! We have another radio show and we’d love for you listen to it. So for a low subscription fee, you will receive access to After The Paracast, plus a higher-quality version of The Paracast free of network ads, and chat rooms when you sign up for The Paracast+. We also offer a special RSS feed for easy updates of the latest episodes, and we've launched The Paracast+ Video Channel. Check out our new “Lifetime” membership! For more information about our premium package, please visit: Introducing The Paracast+ | The Paracast — The Gold Standard of Paranormal Radio.
This Week's Episode: Gene and guest co-host Greg Bishop, host of “Radio Misterioso,” present Erica Lukes, a UFO researcher who has been passionate about UFOs, abductions and the paranormal for her entire life. After a series of personal UFO sightings in 2013, Erica felt compelled to find out what was taking place in Utah. She took a more active role and joined MUFON, becoming a MUFON Field Investigator and then State Director for MUFON in Utah. Erica worked as an Associate Producer for the MUFON Communications team and was also part of the MUFON Experiencer Research Team. She is currently head of the Utah UFO Research Project, an organization dedicated to scientifically researching UAP.
Chris O’Brien’s Site: Our Strange Planet
Radio Misterioso: Radio Misterioso | In-depth conversations on the paranormal alternating with weird music. Live on Sundays 8-10 PM PST @ killradio.org
Erica Lukes’ Site: Erica Lukes UFO Classified
After The Paracast -- Available exclusively to Paracast+ subscribers on May 8: [PG-13] — One of our most intriguing episodes ever, with special guest co-host Greg Bishop. After attacking Gene’s humble culinary attempts, Chris reveals his exclusive recipe for homemade pizza before the action begins: Where do you draw the line on UFO research? Chris explains how he finds it difficult to forgive possible evidence of deception, or faking one’s credentials. He cites in detail a case where he says that researcher Linda Moulton Howe was allegedly paid off to support a discredited UFO case. Though first saying he wouldn’t talk about Jim Moseley, the discussion turns to Jim’s known hoaxes that he owned up to, and how that impacts the UFO field and reputations for honesty. Should we ever turn a blind eye to deception?
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.
Exposing the Fakers
By Gene Steinberg
From the very first episode of The Paracast, we haven’t hesitated to take certain individuals to task for being deceptive, or falsifying their credentials. To me, this is just good journalism. It’s what should also be done by traditional media outlets, but it doesn’t happen as often as it should.
So you often find controversial public figures, and famous corporate executives, being treated with kid gloves. Even when a tough question is asked, there are few followups. You wonder sometimes if those so-called journalists are really becoming note-takers.
Indeed, during the current campaign for President of the U.S., some of the interviewers in recent debates were taken to task merely because they tried to do their job. Instead of just repeating political talking points, they tried to ask serious questions, and, based on the interview subject’s response, ask appropriate followups.
Some of those questions, based on a candidate’s own statements, proved to be embarrassing. But to some people, it wasn’t the fault of the person to whom the question was asked, but the questioner by daring to ask such a “gotcha” question.
At the same time, some reporters all-too-often attempt to strike a false balance, as if two opposed views should be treated equally. It doesn’t matter if one of those views is patently absurd by any reasonable standard. It would almost be the equivalent of giving the statement “the moon is made of green cheese” the same weight as the factual alternative.
Now radio shows that cover UFOs and other offbeat subjects are often considered niche or even fringe. I’ll accept such labels, but The Paracast approaches these subjects seriously. That means not pandering to our audience, or allowing a guest to get away with espousing nonsense or being deceptive.
Over the years, we’ve helped expose more than a few, with the cooperation of serious researchers who are devoted to unearthing the facts. So early on, as we were getting our feet wet, we presented an episode featuring discredited psychic Sean David Morton. My original co-host, David Biedny and I quickly realized he was making it all up.
So in one telling segment on that episode, he claimed to have close ties to the family of the late Gene Roddenberry, the creator of “Star Trek.” Of course, he didn’t, and it went downhill from there.
More recently, Morton and his wife were found guilty of defrauding would-be investors of millions of dollars of their hard-earned cash. It may not have arisen to the level of a Bernie Madoff, but it was nonetheless a serious crime. Those who lost money as a result of Morton’s schemes will never recover a dime of their losses.
Now such well-known frauds as contactee Billy Meier may not cause people to lose their life’s savings. Buying books and other material that contain false information may not rise to the level of an investment fraud. But it’s wasted money — and time — nonetheless.
Now some suggest we should turn the other cheek, and thus ignore the fakers and get on with the business of presenting factual reports and speculation about the paranormal.
But the fakers aren’t going away. Indeed, years or decades after they are exposed, the claims arise anew, as people embrace the same false claims as if nothing ever happened.
It happens often in the UFO field. Today there is a George Adamski Foundation out there. One of their representatives even tried to get on The Paracast.
But when I pointed out some of the ways in which the late flying saucer contactee was exposed over the years, they proclaimed ignorance, or claimed if was just someone’s opinion.
Obviously fake photos aren’t opinions. When people recant their testimony about Adamski’s original 1952 flying saucer contact in the desert, that’s not an opinion either. It’s a case of someone admitting they were wrong or deceived. It’s a significant piece of evidence that ought to be considered.
Now some of you might not know this, but several years before Adamski’s 1952 best-seller, “Flying Saucers Have Landed,” was published, he submitted a manuscript with a similar story to sci-fi editor Ray Palmer. The difference? According to what Palmer wrote years ago, Adamski claimed that the spaceship he encountered was piloted by Jesus Christ. But the message of peace and brotherhood was essentially identical to the one expressed by an alleged alien in that book.
Adamski was once quoted as saying that it was sometimes necessary to go through the “back door” to present the truth. This is taken as his admission that his claims of meeting Jesus or an extraterrestrial were not about the encounter, but about the message he wanted to convey. He felt that few would pay attention if it was just his message, but that message might gain credibility if they was allegedly presented by higher beings.
We admit it. Sometimes we’ve been fooled by people who have falsified their credentials, presenting themselves as something they weren’t.
One example is Pennsylvania UFO researcher Butch Witkowski, someone whose claims of being a law enforcement officer were later found to be false.
Another is example is Philip J. Imbrogno, a co-author of a book from Dr. J. Allen Hynek. Well, after he made four appearances on The Paracast, our listeners discovered that his claim of holding a doctorate from MIT were fake. A brief investigation revealed that he never attended that worthy institution. His claim about distinguished military service, as a member of the Special Forces in Vietnam, was revealed to be a case of “stolen valor.”
Now Imbrogno, thus exposed, soon descended into relative obscurity. But Witkowski doesn’t seem to have suffered all that much from being unmasked. Last time I checked, he was still lecturing, still claiming he was someone that he is not.
On The Paracast, we try to strike a balance. Sometimes we’ll take a “60 Minutes” approach and confront a deceptive guest. On other occasions, we’ll bring on a guest who has been vetted, and allow them to present their evidence, their experiences, and their points of view. But if a comment needs extra clarification or an explanation, we won’t hesitate to ask the hard questions. Sometimes Chris and I are attacked for being too confrontational, but we try to be fair.
As I’ve said on a number of occasions, if we don’t ask the difficult questions, and expose the fakers, who will? Yes, there are some dedicated researchers who won’t suffer fools gladly. But unmasking the fakers in Ufology doesn’t happen near as often as it should.
Copyright 1999-2016 The Paracast LLC. 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 8, 2016
www.theparacast.com
Explore Orange Fireballs and Other Amazing Mysteries 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.
SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! We have another radio show and we’d love for you listen to it. So for a low subscription fee, you will receive access to After The Paracast, plus a higher-quality version of The Paracast free of network ads, and chat rooms when you sign up for The Paracast+. We also offer a special RSS feed for easy updates of the latest episodes, and we've launched The Paracast+ Video Channel. Check out our new “Lifetime” membership! For more information about our premium package, please visit: Introducing The Paracast+ | The Paracast — The Gold Standard of Paranormal Radio.
This Week's Episode: Gene and guest co-host Greg Bishop, host of “Radio Misterioso,” present Erica Lukes, a UFO researcher who has been passionate about UFOs, abductions and the paranormal for her entire life. After a series of personal UFO sightings in 2013, Erica felt compelled to find out what was taking place in Utah. She took a more active role and joined MUFON, becoming a MUFON Field Investigator and then State Director for MUFON in Utah. Erica worked as an Associate Producer for the MUFON Communications team and was also part of the MUFON Experiencer Research Team. She is currently head of the Utah UFO Research Project, an organization dedicated to scientifically researching UAP.
Chris O’Brien’s Site: Our Strange Planet
Radio Misterioso: Radio Misterioso | In-depth conversations on the paranormal alternating with weird music. Live on Sundays 8-10 PM PST @ killradio.org
Erica Lukes’ Site: Erica Lukes UFO Classified
After The Paracast -- Available exclusively to Paracast+ subscribers on May 8: [PG-13] — One of our most intriguing episodes ever, with special guest co-host Greg Bishop. After attacking Gene’s humble culinary attempts, Chris reveals his exclusive recipe for homemade pizza before the action begins: Where do you draw the line on UFO research? Chris explains how he finds it difficult to forgive possible evidence of deception, or faking one’s credentials. He cites in detail a case where he says that researcher Linda Moulton Howe was allegedly paid off to support a discredited UFO case. Though first saying he wouldn’t talk about Jim Moseley, the discussion turns to Jim’s known hoaxes that he owned up to, and how that impacts the UFO field and reputations for honesty. Should we ever turn a blind eye to deception?
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.
Exposing the Fakers
By Gene Steinberg
From the very first episode of The Paracast, we haven’t hesitated to take certain individuals to task for being deceptive, or falsifying their credentials. To me, this is just good journalism. It’s what should also be done by traditional media outlets, but it doesn’t happen as often as it should.
So you often find controversial public figures, and famous corporate executives, being treated with kid gloves. Even when a tough question is asked, there are few followups. You wonder sometimes if those so-called journalists are really becoming note-takers.
Indeed, during the current campaign for President of the U.S., some of the interviewers in recent debates were taken to task merely because they tried to do their job. Instead of just repeating political talking points, they tried to ask serious questions, and, based on the interview subject’s response, ask appropriate followups.
Some of those questions, based on a candidate’s own statements, proved to be embarrassing. But to some people, it wasn’t the fault of the person to whom the question was asked, but the questioner by daring to ask such a “gotcha” question.
At the same time, some reporters all-too-often attempt to strike a false balance, as if two opposed views should be treated equally. It doesn’t matter if one of those views is patently absurd by any reasonable standard. It would almost be the equivalent of giving the statement “the moon is made of green cheese” the same weight as the factual alternative.
Now radio shows that cover UFOs and other offbeat subjects are often considered niche or even fringe. I’ll accept such labels, but The Paracast approaches these subjects seriously. That means not pandering to our audience, or allowing a guest to get away with espousing nonsense or being deceptive.
Over the years, we’ve helped expose more than a few, with the cooperation of serious researchers who are devoted to unearthing the facts. So early on, as we were getting our feet wet, we presented an episode featuring discredited psychic Sean David Morton. My original co-host, David Biedny and I quickly realized he was making it all up.
So in one telling segment on that episode, he claimed to have close ties to the family of the late Gene Roddenberry, the creator of “Star Trek.” Of course, he didn’t, and it went downhill from there.
More recently, Morton and his wife were found guilty of defrauding would-be investors of millions of dollars of their hard-earned cash. It may not have arisen to the level of a Bernie Madoff, but it was nonetheless a serious crime. Those who lost money as a result of Morton’s schemes will never recover a dime of their losses.
Now such well-known frauds as contactee Billy Meier may not cause people to lose their life’s savings. Buying books and other material that contain false information may not rise to the level of an investment fraud. But it’s wasted money — and time — nonetheless.
Now some suggest we should turn the other cheek, and thus ignore the fakers and get on with the business of presenting factual reports and speculation about the paranormal.
But the fakers aren’t going away. Indeed, years or decades after they are exposed, the claims arise anew, as people embrace the same false claims as if nothing ever happened.
It happens often in the UFO field. Today there is a George Adamski Foundation out there. One of their representatives even tried to get on The Paracast.
But when I pointed out some of the ways in which the late flying saucer contactee was exposed over the years, they proclaimed ignorance, or claimed if was just someone’s opinion.
Obviously fake photos aren’t opinions. When people recant their testimony about Adamski’s original 1952 flying saucer contact in the desert, that’s not an opinion either. It’s a case of someone admitting they were wrong or deceived. It’s a significant piece of evidence that ought to be considered.
Now some of you might not know this, but several years before Adamski’s 1952 best-seller, “Flying Saucers Have Landed,” was published, he submitted a manuscript with a similar story to sci-fi editor Ray Palmer. The difference? According to what Palmer wrote years ago, Adamski claimed that the spaceship he encountered was piloted by Jesus Christ. But the message of peace and brotherhood was essentially identical to the one expressed by an alleged alien in that book.
Adamski was once quoted as saying that it was sometimes necessary to go through the “back door” to present the truth. This is taken as his admission that his claims of meeting Jesus or an extraterrestrial were not about the encounter, but about the message he wanted to convey. He felt that few would pay attention if it was just his message, but that message might gain credibility if they was allegedly presented by higher beings.
We admit it. Sometimes we’ve been fooled by people who have falsified their credentials, presenting themselves as something they weren’t.
One example is Pennsylvania UFO researcher Butch Witkowski, someone whose claims of being a law enforcement officer were later found to be false.
Another is example is Philip J. Imbrogno, a co-author of a book from Dr. J. Allen Hynek. Well, after he made four appearances on The Paracast, our listeners discovered that his claim of holding a doctorate from MIT were fake. A brief investigation revealed that he never attended that worthy institution. His claim about distinguished military service, as a member of the Special Forces in Vietnam, was revealed to be a case of “stolen valor.”
Now Imbrogno, thus exposed, soon descended into relative obscurity. But Witkowski doesn’t seem to have suffered all that much from being unmasked. Last time I checked, he was still lecturing, still claiming he was someone that he is not.
On The Paracast, we try to strike a balance. Sometimes we’ll take a “60 Minutes” approach and confront a deceptive guest. On other occasions, we’ll bring on a guest who has been vetted, and allow them to present their evidence, their experiences, and their points of view. But if a comment needs extra clarification or an explanation, we won’t hesitate to ask the hard questions. Sometimes Chris and I are attacked for being too confrontational, but we try to be fair.
As I’ve said on a number of occasions, if we don’t ask the difficult questions, and expose the fakers, who will? Yes, there are some dedicated researchers who won’t suffer fools gladly. But unmasking the fakers in Ufology doesn’t happen near as often as it should.
Copyright 1999-2016 The Paracast LLC. 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!
