1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+! For a low subscription fee, you will receive access to an ad-free version of The Paracast, the exclusive After The Paracast podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, plus show transcripts, the new Paracast+ Video Channel, Classic Episodes and Special Features categories! We now offer lifetime memberships! You can subscribe via this direct link:

    The Official Paracast Store is back! Check out our latest lineup of customized stuff at: The Official Paracast Store!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!
    Dismiss Notice

Your Paracast Newsletter — October 25, 2015

Discussion in 'The Paracast Newsletter' started by Gene Steinberg, Oct 24, 2015.

  1. Gene Steinberg

    Gene Steinberg Forum Super Hero Staff Member

    Feb 26, 2006
    Likes Received:
    Forum Super Hero
    Home Page:
    October 25, 2015

    UFO Researcher Stanton T. Friedman Presents a UFO Research Update 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.

    Announcing The Paracast+: We have another radio show, and for a low subscription fee, you will receive access to After The Paracast, plus a higher-quality version of The Paracast without the network ads, and chat rooms. NEW! We’ve added an RSS feed for fast updates of the latest episodes and we give free ebooks for long-term subscriptions. A Paracast+ video channel is coming soon. 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 Chris present an update on “traditional” UFO research with the “dean” of UFO researchers, Stanton T. Friedman, a long-time UFO investigator and a nuclear physicist. Friedman is one of the key researchers into the Roswell crash and other events over the years, and has posited a strong case that the phenomenon is the result of extraterrestrials visiting Earth. His recent books include “Flying Saucers and Science” (2008) and “Science Was Wrong,” (2010) co-authored with Kathleen Marden. He also wrote the foreword to “How to Talk to An Alien,” from Nancy du Tertre. And, yes, he will be responding to questions about alien abductions.

    Chris O’Brien’s Site: Our Strange Planet

    Stanton T. Friedman’s Site: Stanton Friedman - Physicist, Lecturer, UFO Researcher

    After The Paracast -- Available exclusively to Paracast+ subscribers on October 25: Gene and Chris continue to express their concerns about the lack of evidence of UFO abductions. If the subjects turn off the web cams installed to watch the abductions in action, what about an external surveillance system of some sort? Would we see something going on outside a home, such as a spaceship landing or flying overhead? Or is ET just too powerful to allow us to perform that level of surveillance, even if this is a physical phenomenon? Is the present system of investigating UFO abductions working, or does it need to be overhauled. The discussion extends to Stanton T. Friedman’s descriptions of a “Cosmic Watergate,” that the governments of Earth know the truth about extraterrestrial visitations, but they are withholding it from us. Is this a cop-out to explain the lack of conclusive UFO evidence, or something we have to deal with? We also talk about the presenc e of scientists in UFO research, even if their degrees are in other fields. There’s also a brief discussion covering the controversy involving abductee Emma Woods and abduction researcher Dr. David Jacobs. Chris expresses his reservations about Dr. Jacobs’ research.

    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.

    The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
    By Gene Steinberg

    The debates about the recent appearance of Dr. David Jacobs on The Paracast have been hot and heavy, far more so than for his last appearance back in 2010. But it’s not just his controversial interactions with one of his subjects, known by a pseudonym, Emma Woods, but his entire approach to investigating UFO abductions.

    It almost seems as if these concerns have festered for several years before coming out into the open.

    One major concern is the way he handles hypnotic sessions with his subjects, people who claim to be in contact with, or abducted by, entities from other worlds. If these experiencers remember these interactions without any help, that’s one thing. But if it requires an attempt to retrieve possible buried memories of such encounters, that itself is highly controversial. The practice of hypnotic regression is messy, and requires a trained therapist.

    It’s supposedly far too easy for the untrained practitioner to embed his or her own beliefs or expectations onto the subject, which may result in false memory recollections. It’s supposed to be a no-no to ask potentially leading questions, because the subjects may recount memories that do not, in fact, exist, or are highly distorted to match the investigator’s expectations.

    Dr. Jacobs asserts his methods are more about relaxation than hypnosis, and that the witness cannot be forced or otherwise persuaded to remember things that didn’t occur. They’d simply move the discussion back to what really happened. “No, it wasn’t that way at all,” I suppose.

    But when you attempt to probe the dark recesses of the human subconscious, particularly with people who are quite possibly deeply traumatized by their experiences, the process has to be left to trained professionals. Laymen researchers may certainly observe, and use that evidence as part of their own interviews and efforts to record conscious memories. But what qualifies them to deal with all the permutations of such interactions unless they are properly trained?

    It may be that what Dr. Jacobs did was totally aboveboard, and that mental health therapists, upon examining his data, would find it thoroughly professional. I am not qualified to make that determination, but I am skeptical.

    I am also concerned about the fact that UFO abduction experiences so often mirror the expectations of the investigator. So with Dr. Jacobs, they are horrifying affairs in their implications: ET is here gathering genetic samples and creating a race of hybrids (and/or “hubrids”) who can pass for human and are slowly infiltrating our society. To fit in, or to take over? The implications are disturbing.

    But other abduction research paints a picture of the testing of reproductive systems that appears to be done strictly in the interests of gathering data about Earthlings. Where there is communication with ET, it’s often about their concerns over our warlike ways. We should listen to our Space Brothers and follow a righteous path.

    So are these researchers somehow manipulating their evidence to confirm to their expectations, or the theories they developed early on? Do their approaches merely attract people whose experiences appear to match those expectations? Or does that mean the methodology is all wrong and has to be overhauled?

    I grant there could be a race of aliens who mean us harm, and another race of aliens who have our best interests in mind, and possibly yet another race that doesn’t care one way or the there. Perhaps the UFO enigma involves visits by many alien species with different motivations. We must live on a very crowded planet.

    Regardless of the theories about such experiences, is there any way to actually prove what’s going on?

    You’d think that if these encounters are physical, other individuals present when they occur would see the aliens in action. And what about installing surveillance devices in the homes and work areas where these experiences occur so investigators can see what’s really happening?

    Nowadays, with cheap smartphones and web cams, it should be a fairly simple, seamless process. You can monitor activity from any location with a cellular connection. There are prebuilt systems that serve as burglar/home intrusion alarms, or just to monitor any room in your home when you’re away. The technology doesn’t require a security or IT expert for installation.

    Well, there’s an answer — or an excuse — for that. Both Dr. Jacobs and this weekend’s guest, Stanton T. Friedman, assert that attempting that sort of surveillance has been problematic. It appears that the abductees simply turn off the monitoring systems. That, as they say, is that.

    Now even if it’s true that they have no conscious memory of disabling those surveillance systems, what about working out something with another family member, so the experiencers wouldn’t be consciously aware that they are being observed? Obviously you can’t just enter someone’s home uninvited to set up a security system without a court order to do so. That would be breaking and entering.

    A typical response is that our visitors are just too smart to allow us to covertly observe their activities when they are busy kidnapping and probing the populace. That might indeed be true, and maybe there’s a zero datapoint there that investigators can analyze, or perhaps use as a basis to devise alternative methods to track the experiencer that would succeed, if possible.

    It’s also an excuse. What if the surveillance video showed someone fast asleep in their beds when the abduction supposedly occurred? Does that mean that ET is somehow distorting the video, or looping the video so the actual abduction isn’t visible? Or does it demonstrate the possibly real fact that at least some of these abductions are not physical events at all? Nobody is physically leaving their location to go aboard a spaceship. It could be sleep paralysis, it could be a vivid dream, or it could represent some sort of subconscious interaction with an external force that is interpreted as an alien abduction.

    Why an alien abduction? That’s part and parcel of our popular culture. In times past, when we weren’t living in a society taking halting steps towards space travel, the interaction might be with a supernatural creature, or a deity. We interpret that interaction in the way in which we’re conditioned.

    The problem with abduction research is this: The reports are strictly anecdotal. Where there are supposed recovered implants, they do not clearly represent a possible alien tracking or RFID device. Indeed, if the aliens are so advanced, isn’t it possible their surveillance hardware would be microscopic, organic, or otherwise undetectable? Would it even require installing any hardware? Maybe they could read an individual’s genetic markings remotely to stay in contact with them. In other words, there is nothing you could do to stop them from watching you.

    Unfortunately the focus on UFO abductions as physical interactions with aliens of various motives may be obscuring the reality behind these events. Research these days is too compartmentalized, focusing too much on one theory or another. Worse, emotions are high, and there’s more heat than light.

    Maybe it’s time to tear down the walls and view the evidence from a fresh perspective.

    Copyright 1999-2015 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!
    Mr. Fibuli likes this.

Share This Page