12-9-07 show

[Miah]

I'm very serious here, and I'm sure that David would be happy to provide additional information, if available, to help you listeners find more details about his various experiences. We can't do it alone.

In addition, it's high time the flamewars stop. Demands will not deliver facts. Research will, however.

On the flamewars part, if you reread most of what has been asked and said on THIS THREAD from a completely objective view, most of it was legitimate and seems to have been taken in a negative manner.

I'm trying to help, but I need answers to my questions to work with. I think I could track down that Ferris guy with some information.

 

[Siani]

So let me see if I have this straight, 70% of the population have paranormal events, and many of them have repeat anomalous events during their lifetimes...wouldn't that make most of the world nuts?

I'm not arguing with you, but your points are off-topic.

No. I did not say 70% of the population have paranormal events. I quoted a survey where 70% of 2000 respondents reported paranormal events. I also said I was aware it was too small a sample to be 100% representative of the population at large. I quoted it as an indicator that paranormal events are not as rare as you seem to believe. My points are not off-topic - maybe you're taking a dismissive approach because the points I made are not only relevant, but expose your argument's weak logic? BTW, did you intentionally or accidentally call the experiencers of paranormal events nuts? If that's your stance, i.e. that those of us who have had paranormal experiences are doolally, why the interest in the subject? Just curious. And I'm not arguing either, just debating . Sadly, the computer screen strips away voice inflection, facial expressions, etc, and words on a screen can seem a lot more confrontational than the spirit in which they were written.

 

[Miah]

So let me see if I have this straight, 70% of the population have paranormal events, and many of them have repeat anomalous events during their lifetimes...wouldn't that make most of the world nuts?

I'm not arguing with you, but your points are off-topic.

No. I did not say
I quoted
I also said
I quoted
My points
the points I made are not only relevant, but expose your argument's weak logic? BTW, did you intentionally or accidentally call the experiencers of paranormal events nuts? If that's your stance
And I'm not arguing either, just debating .

Sadly, the computer screen strips away voice inflection, facial expressions, etc, and words on a screen can seem a lot more confrontational than the spirit in which they were written.

I got it, and don't wish to continue this debate in the spirit of the topic.

 

[CapnG]

So let me see if I have this straight, 70% of the population have paranormal events, and many of them have repeat anomalous events during their lifetimes...wouldn't that make most of the world nuts?

If there's nothing to the paranormal, yes. Otherwise the remaining 30% of people would seem to be either be "deficient" in some way (ie either unable to percieve or unwilling to accept paranormal events) or just really unlucky/lucky (depending on the nature of the exeperience and it's outcome).

For the record, I do not rule out the fact that I have had some minor paranomal events in my life might preclude the fact that I'm totally coo-coo for coaco puffs.

 

[Poi]

We do not know whether or not the incident at Lourdes was a mass hallucination or not, or whether that applies to the sighting David, his family and many others had in Venezuela. You just want to look at the dark side of this, clearly.

Clearly I wasn't clear at all. I think Verum is comfortable with no gray areas in his life. I have no problem with Lourdes being one thing or the other ... or something else altogether, Gene.

It was my favorite show so far because David told us something fantastic which occurred in his life. I look for that kind of confirmation for the things that have happened to me. One wonders just how odd his own life is so it helps to hear from others who have witnessed similar events. It helps.

 

[Mothra]

I don't see why David is being put under the microscope. He shared something that happened to him as a child. It was important event in his life. I enjoyed hearing it. i don't need validation for some of the things thats happened to me. I know what happened and thats all that matters.

Yes David can be a pain in the ass sometimes, and Gene needs to engage himself in the conversation a little bit more (IMHO) but overall this show is a labor of love and it shows. I'm not here kissing peoples butts, but I finally found a no bullshit zone. If they have one of these coast to coast clowns on the show they expose them for that that they are.If only your show was around during hale-Bop

 

[Verum]

Gene wrote...

You are also being hypocritical by constantly demanding extraordinary proof from David and not demanding the same of every other person who has had a UFO sighting reported in this forum.

What? I most certainly have been consistent in demanding more than just an anecdote from every "experiencer". Most interesting, though, is your contention that I'm demanding "extraordinary proof". David claims thousands experienced this sighting. I'm not asking him to prove the source of the event, just that this event was shared by thousands. That is hardly extraordinary. That is fundamental. And this happened in the 1970'a not 1947. Why, in all these years, didn't David ever think to secure documentation to support the event. You mean he never thought to keep a copy of all the press reports on such a life-changing event? And in the ensuing years he never thought to pursue the matter to get even a modicum of documentation for this sighting? THAT stretches credibility to the point of breaking. How about this? Richard Dolan is a legitimate researcher. Ask him to find documentation. Or Friedman? These people manage to research events many decades older and more obscure than a 1970's sighting over a major city seen by thousands. Wouldn't being able to bring to the fore this remarkable event be a giant step forward for "ufology"? So, if David is reticent to actively pursue evidence surely one of these "friends" of The Paracast would leap at the opportunity. Or perhaps one of David's many South American friends can help.

Look, I have a theory of what's going on here. And it seems a most likely and logical answer to this very peculiar situation, with "paranormal hosts" reacting so viscerally over what should have been a simple request for documentation of one's claimed extraordinary event. The "spin" has been extraordinary, from my being some wild-eyed religious cretin to my making demands for extraordinary proofs. And for you to characterize it as my engaging in a flamewar is preposterous. I did no such thing. You did, David did, some of the posters here did. But I did not. A reading of this entire thread will demonstrate I have simply asked for an ordinary level of "proof" of a remarkably extraordinary claim, and I have been relentless in that because the claim demands no less from any thinking person. Why not get over the basic threshold by proving that "something" happened?

Something else is clearly afoot here...and I think I know what it is.

 

[David Biedny]

Miah - I would be thrilled if you ended up finding Mr. Ferris. As I think I mentioned on the episode, my address was 27 Patton Drive, Somerset, NY. The Ferris house was directly across the street from us. That would make the Ferris' what, 25, 26 or 28 Patton Drive. The year was 1972 or 73.

As I've already mentioned, I've only become proactive on this stuff since we started The Paracast, and have made some inquiries into finding the Caracas paper/s with the front page article. It's been made clear that I would either have to show up in person, or find someone willing to take the time and effort to do it on my behalf. We did indeed have at least one of the papers from the next day, but it got lost at some point during one of the moves. That's the nature of reality, folks, and we've spoken about this with Jeff Ritzmann who, BTW, is also someone with extreme episodes and a lack of hard physical proof (for the most part). Do I think that Jeff is telling the truth about what he's seen and interacted with? Yes, I do indeed believe him, after having spent time with him and his family. I do not think for a moment that he is lying/fabricating a damned thing. Those of you who might doubt him are welcome to your own opinions, but in MY opinion, he's telling the truth. Can I prove it? No. Can HE prove it? Nope.

The VAST majority of paranormal events lack hard evidence, which is obviously deeply frustrating to the experiencers, but that's part and parcel of the nature of the topic. And for those of you who say that we are relentless in demanding hard evidence of our guests who report paranormal experiences, I don't think you're listening very carefully. When someone like Goldberg comes on the show and claims that he has the answers about the nature of the future, has had numerous interactions with time travelers, claims to be able to teach anyone how to contact said time travelers, you better believe that we're gonna demand hard proof. On the other hand, show me how many direct experiencers have been on the show and who we've raked over the coals. Go ahead.

And as the idea that UFO sightings receive a vast amount of media attention - and especially during the 70s - I think that's incorrect, and a large part of it is due to the fact that most people would be hesitant to go on the record with a sighting, and most papers are reluctant to run stories about said sightings. When my father called the local paper, they practically laughed him off the phone. Or am I lying about this? What exactly do I have to gain by making this up? Do folks think that if something can't be verified on the net, that makes it false? Do you think ALL human knowledge, history and wisdom is a mouse click away? Think again.

The thing that REALLY irks me is when faceless people on the internet claim that I'm hallucinating and lying, as well as my family and friends who have been brave enough to come on this show, on the record, and verify my statements about the experiences I've shared. I don't like being called a liar, and will tell anyone accusing me of such, that they should go screw themselves. I am cohosting a show about paranormal topics because of my own personal interest and experiences in the realm. That's how this show came to be - I am NOT making these experiences up in order to feed the show, which is what I think some of you might suspect. All I have to go on is my personal integrity, and my word. Those of you who have reasons to doubt me, I'm sad about that, but that's the way the cookie crumbles. I am not going to play into your sense of entitlement and drop my life in order to jump like a monkey for you, hop a plane to Venezuela and come back with a printout of a page from a paper 30 years ago, you'll just claim that I used my significant desktop publishing skills to fabricate the thing. When I can get a copy of that front page, this'll be the first place I post it, make no mistake, but your demands are meaningless to me. Get over it. Verum, some of the abusive shit you've posted here makes me want to ban your ass, but I've not done so. That said, I'm getting tired of it, so you're on notice. If you claim that I'm a lonely, sad, psychotic person, it's abusive and will NOT be tolerated. Back your own statements up, or go find somewhere else to troll. I don't owe you a damned thing, certainly not a drop of respect. People like you are the reason I hesitated to go public with this stuff for so long, so do me a favor, go watch someone chase a ball.

dB

 

[grannysmith]

To quote from another thread :

"Jesus H. Christmas Tree, I'm listening to this absolute car crash of the current episode, and I'm amazed that I didn't just start screaming "YOU FUCKING MORON, SHUT THE FUCK UP AND STOP DRINKING CRACK"..... this guy just can't STFU".

LOL - what's sauce for the goose ... (people aren't so much asking for 'proof' here but just some independent corroboration, Dave : and then only where your story suggests this may exist. Hell, I think they just want some acknowledgement that this type of corroboration would be necessary to establish the intersubjective - please note I don't say 'objective' - veracity of the tale).

 

[David Biedny]

My friend Bill Vellekoop came on and gave independent corroboration of our Florida experience, and my brother Barry came on and told his own version of the Caracas story. Sorry, I don't have independent witnesses to EVERY ONE of my experiences. That's the truth, sorry to say.

So does that mean I should hesitate to talk about experiences where I don't have independent corroboration? Perhaps, it's certainly been my approach so far, and will continue to be, especially after reading the contents of this thread.

dB

 

[Verum]

David Biedny wrote...

All I have to go on is my personal integrity, and my word.

Is that the standard you'll now apply to all your guests? How can you possibly ever again challenge a guest or a claim when you have lowered the standard you urge for your own claims to "trust me", the single most unreliable and subjective level possible? I've offered several possible routes someone of your clout and wide international network of friends and colleagues can pursue to document the simple happening...not the what or why, just that thousands saw the same extraordinary something at the very same time. Why not try them? The interesting thing is that YOUR claims--unlike Jeff's--were founded on the "credibility" of being shared by thousands, out in public, in a country that isn't part of the U.S.'s great cover-up. So simply prove that part of your claim. The more you protest the curiouser it all gets.

I think there's something very interesting at work here. It certainly makes more sense than the strange reactions by you and Gene and the steadfast refusal to actively pursue simple documentation of extraordinary claims.

 

[grannysmith]

My friend Bill Vellekoop came on and gave independent corroboration of our Florida experience, and my brother Barry came on and told his own version of the Caracas story. Sorry, I don't have independent witnesses to EVERY ONE of my experiences. That's the truth, sorry to say.

So does that mean I should hesitate to talk about experiences where I don't have independent corroboration? Perhaps, it's certainly been my approach so far, and will continue to be, especially after reading the contents of this thread.

dB

Okay fine. With respect, I think that 'independent' may imply not someone who 'could' be 'in' on any deception - I'm really not accusing you of this but you must be aware that standards of witness statement veracity require some 'distance' from the person whose story is being corroborated (it runs parallel to the old bias rule in English Public Law : 'justice must not just be done but must be seen to be done' - which is why the mere risk - and not actuality - of bias disables a person from hearing a case).

Now, there should be an environment of enabling sharing of paranormal experiences but though you say you don't care what others think, you choose to share your experiences publicly : you must be aware that others must have more to go on than 'trust me and my brother' etc - this is why 'independent' must mean 'with no possible motive to support your story just because it's your story' - this is only required where possible ie. the Caracas event.

Seriously, mate, I find you interesting on the show but I think you have a bit of a blind spot on some issues

 

[David Biedny]

Verum,

I'll state this one last time, and then I'm done interacting with you, someone who has been highly and personally abusive towards me - I've made the calls, and been told I'll have to show up in person or have someone show up on my behalf in order to go through the microfiche archives. I've put out the call, and am trying to do it, but it's hard to get this to happen from thousands of miles away. I would love to have that front page, and will share it the moment I have it. You're obviously free to doubt me, and there's nothing I can do about that, not that I would even if I could. You've called the accounts of my brother and close personal friend into question, and have eluded to some ulterior motive for me sharing my stories. Believe what you want, I really don't care, it doesn't effect my reality one iota.

dB

 

[Alea]

For the record, the spinning sun event occurred in Fatima in Portugal around 1918. The events were experienced by thousands of people. The events were noted in the newspapers of the time. The Catholic Church does stand by these events.

The event that occurred at Lourdes happened in the 1850's and involved Bernadette Soubirous and the discovery of a healing spring that is still in existence. The healings have been documented and verified. The Catholic Church also stands by these events as do many well respected and highly regarded medical professionals. As always, I SUGGEST that folks do their homework.

And thank you David, for being so open with your experiences. While you may not have "documents" to validate all of the events, you have been open and honest about providing names of multiple real witnesses and locations. In addition, by airing your experiences to a critical group of friends, you are opening up the opportunity for peer review. Perhaps someone will pick up the gauntlet and do some ACTUAL RESEARCH. If someone has connections to a university library in Caracas, I am willing to work with that person to locate a newspaper from the 70's that documents the sighting that you described.

Many folks are hesitant to express their experiences because they are attacked by others. If a true research model was put in place and real objective investigation done, SANS attacks, perhaps we would be closer to the truth than we are now. People need to step outside of their private reality tunnels and take a global view of the world. It's not easy, but if we wish to evolve spiritually and emotionally, walking in another's shoes is very helpful.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Verum,

I'll state this one last time, and then I'm done interacting with you, someone who has been highly and personally abusive towards me - I've made the calls, and been told I'll have to show up in person or have someone show up on my behalf in order to go through the microfiche archives. I've put out the call, and am trying to do it, but it's hard to get this to happen from thousands of miles away. I would love to have that front page, and will share it the moment I have it. You're obviously free to doubt me, and there's nothing I can do about this. You've called the accounts of my brother and close personal friend into question, and have eluded to some ulterior motive for me sharing my stories. Believe what you want, I really don't care, it doesn't effect my reality one iota.

dB

And let me go on record that if catch Verum continuing his abusive behavior, he's off this forum. If he wants to ask some reasonable questions and help us do some real research, great. Otherwise, one more post attacking you, my friend, and he's history!

 

[Siani]

David, I hope you continue to share your experiences with us, regardless of the negativity of certain forum members. I guess it's hard for people with no experiences of their own, to see any veracity in accounts of paranormal phenomena, but that's no excuse for narrow-mindedness and personal slurs.

 

[Verum]

Gene wrote...

And let me go on record that if catch Verum continuing his abusive behavior, he's off this forum. If he wants to ask some reasonable questions and help us do some real research, great. Otherwise, one more post attacking you, my friend, and he's history!

Well that's hardly a shock. Perhaps you can start by simply pointing, specifically, to any post of mine in which I've engaged in abusive behavior towards David, you or anyone else posting here. Your notion of "abusive" is daring to subject David to precisely the same standards you purport to apply to others' claims. Interesting that neither of you is responding to the substantive suggestions by me and several other posters to document the surrounding contentions of David's sighting. Just call Dolan or Friedman or Birnes or any of your contacts in the field and ask them to use their contacts and research skills to confirm or refute David's contention. You have both relentlessly crucified and mocked George Noory for accepting all claims at face value. You now ask that we do exactly the same thing with David's claim, which certainly stands as one the most extraordinary reports ever offered. Can't you understand why this would strike a reasonable person as unreasonable?

By the way, why are my postings "abusive" when David is the only one using vulgar language and personal attacks? Just another incongruity with which I struggle.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Gene wrote...

And let me go on record that if catch Verum continuing his abusive behavior, he's off this forum. If he wants to ask some reasonable questions and help us do some real research, great. Otherwise, one more post attacking you, my friend, and he's history!

Well that's hardly a shock. Perhaps you can start by simply pointing, specifically, to any post of mine in which I've engaged in abusive behavior towards David, you or anyone else posting here. Your notion of "abusive" is daring to subject David to precisely the same standards you purport to apply to others' claims. Interesting that neither of you is responding to the substantive suggestions by me and several other posters to document the surrounding contentions of David's sighting. Just call Dolan or Friedman or Birnes or any of your contacts in the field and ask them to use their contacts and research skills to confirm or refute David's contention. You have both relentlessly crucified and mocked George Noory for accepting all claims at face value. You now ask that we do exactly the same thing with David's claim, which certainly stands as one the most extraordinary reports ever offered. Can't you understand why this would strike a reasonable person as unreasonable?

By the way, why are my postings "abusive" when David is the only one using vulgar language and personal attacks? Just another incongruity with which I struggle.

We have never asked anyone to accept David's reports at face value. If you read one of my previous posts, we've asked our army of listeners to help David get more information about these encounters.

Please stop distorting the facts, and let this conversation end here. If you have nothing constructive to say, say nothing, because any future posts from you that continue to beat the same dead horse will be deleted, and you'll face removal from our forums. No more warnings!

But if you want to help us discover more about what happened to David, we'd appreciate the assistance.

 

[David Biedny]

So when Verum stated I was sad, lonely, psychotic and all the other superlatives he offered (I'd love to see his psychology degree, he seems to have such deep insights into my personal life and inner dialog), I'd call that hateful content. But that's me...

dB

 

[jritzmann]

So when Verum stated I was sad, lonely, psychotic and all the other superlatives he offered (I'd love to see his psychology degree, he seems to have such deep insights into my personal life and inner dialog), I'd call that hateful content. But that's me...

dB

Lets not forget someone we know who used to speak of us both in that fashion. Hmmm?

Never underestimate the longevity of hate within zealots.