Alternative iConference #3

[Walter Bosley]

Don't they all sort of imply, if not say, they are seeking the truth?

One indicator that people are seeking entertainment over truth, for me (it may not be this way for anyone else), is when I hear the same questions asked over and over. Admittedly, I was asked to be on some shows because I'm former AFOSI, but I can only offer so much in that regard and I think I have exhausted what I can offer. I'm actually bored with discussing UFOs "from the former AFOSI agent perspective". Speaking for myself, my own ideas on the topic have advanced beyond the scripture and dogma so going back to step 1 is sort of uninteresting for me. So, when Roswell comes up -- especially from the ET angle -- and I know the question asker is not a newbie, I see that it's entertainment, not so much truth-seeking.

I can't speak for others, but I've found that the deeper you look at something the more texture it shows and sometimes even evolves into something beyond your initial assumption. The UFO phenomenon definitely fits this, which is why I'm personally bored with the standard ET hypothesis as the answer. It's PART of the answer, I think.

The entertainer doesn't like to push too far outside the box of what's popular at the moment, but the truth-seeker IS pushed outside the box. If someone is doggedly insistent on a particular theory, that can make them resistant to thinking outside the paradigm they prefer, thus they may be sincere and not just providing entertainment. It depends. I try to take things case by case when determining for myself.

Blah blah blah. For me, the best thing to do is to just write it down in a book and whoever wants to read it will, whoever doesn't want to read it won't. I don't personally find it a good use of my time working too hard to convince anyone of anything I've found. I can only talk about it so many times on a media venue. I don't see myself as an entertainer in the paranormal/UFO media, and I think that's why I'm bored with appearing in it.

 

[Walter Bosley]

Not that it matters to anyone!

 

[Goggs Mackay]

It is certainly seems to be true that there is little point trying to convince anyone of anything in this field. Probably isn't much point either - if people don't come to think a certain way themselves then they are just sheep who's opinion I am not interested in.

All anyone can do is say their piece and allow others to take what they will.

 

[Blabyboy]

It is certainly seems to be true that there is little point trying to convince anyone of anything in this field. Probably isn't much point either - if people don't come to think a certain way themselves then they are just sheep who's opinion I am not interested in.

All anyone can do is say their piece and allow others to take what they will.

Yes, I agree with you I think.

People are offering the truth from their perspective - it may or may not be your perspective, but it helps to round out the case/subject/genre as a whole by being exposed to it - if nothing more than to make you aware of the cruft that exists around the topic and at best to provide a new avenue for investigation, however that may be accomplished.

Entertainers also have large cross-section of listeners to cater for, so they can't always go deeper in certain aspects, that's why I like the paracast - it has a more niche audience I feel, although maybe Gene would like it to grow, I think because of it's audience, it is able to delve a little deeper into some of the cases. The same with DMR, my experience is that Don kinda assumes that the listeners are more clued up on the topic at hand and so you can circumvent a lot of setup time by maybe just having a short 5 min refresher to get your brain in that domain.

You then learn to sift and categorise for speed and hopefully hone your thoughts to go in the direction you best see fit. I see each blogpost, each podcast, each video, each 'revolutionary' new expose of the subject as another exercise for my brain and thought processes around this whole subject. Even listening to the same person on different shows can be interesting even though I may disagree with what they are actually proposing, do they follow the same mantra on each show? do they embelish a little more in one performance? do they clarify something previously stated, or perhaps contradict themselves? It's about being able to find the shinola.

Until we get a definitive answer (whatever that is), for me everyone's truth is valid... I just may not agree with it. And even then some might not see the answer as the right 'truth' for them. So why worry, you get sod all time on this rock, why not pursue the truths that most appeal to you and that you feel enthused to find out about.... otherwise we're headed into Dogma territory

 

[Kieran]

@Kieran - I'm sad to hear that about Kevin. Actually mate, a few weeks back someone posted a Kevin Smith episode youtube video which had a guy who built a boat from popsicle sticks and sailed across the channel or something. Anyway, mostly due to his distinct lack of nautical knowledge, his insistence on referring to himself as 'captain' repeatedly when it is obvious he was nothing of the sort and also his tall tale about USO's and MIB's.
In fact, I think 99% of it was a sham. If Kevin was a cop for as long as he says, then he should have a good instinct as to when people are lying.

I had thought, like you, about emailing Kevin and telling him that guest was full of shit and in the past when there were guests I thought were full of it, I'd thought about contacting Kevin and asking him if he minds 'friends' coming on his show and lying to his face and audience?
I didn't bother and I am disappointed to hear of his response to you.

BUT! Even so, Kevin did a good job with the conference, I loved his presentation and I loved the other ones too. So yes, there are utterly shit unbelievable guests on his show but sometimes he does good stuff. I just weed out the crap as best I can!

If you aware the person your bringing on your show is a liar, a cheat and a con artist. Is their any good reason after that to have that person back on your show once that's known to you? What more can i do like am i the bad man for bringing this to his attention? How is this subject to be ever taken seriously, truly. If this how we do business? I don't care what he has done since. He has shown his true colors to me, and obviously does not know how to separate signal from noise. Watch this guy seriously he is idiot, how gullible can people be its astounding to me.

 

[Walter Bosley]

That's just it. The subjects are never going to be taken seriously by the masses or the media. There are more immediate practical concerns than the truth about the paranormal or UFOs. I think that's by design. The reason the media is so full of the questionable sources is because the experience of this stuff is intended primarily for a personal experience level. Even sincere and honest sources can't really prove themselves satisfactorily to everyone -- the nature of the beast won't let that happen. Even an honest purveyor of the stuff must eventually give time to the questionable because there is only so much of the reasonably valid (or possibly valid) available. I think one either says "I'm not going there again" or takes the other route of "I love the attention so much, I'll just push the envelope to keep a piece of the spotlight". Knowing Kevin personally, I'd say that he presents, you decide, for the most part where his guests are concerned. And remember, he is on five nights a week. Personally, as a guest, I'd rather bow out of the spotlight ( as I have ), than drum crap up to stay in it or, just as bad, keep repeating myself year after year.

 

[trainedobserver]

Knowing Kevin personally, I'd say that he presents, you decide, for the most part where his guests are concerned. And remember, he is on five nights a week. Personally, as a guest, I'd rather bow out of the spotlight ( as I have ), than drum crap up to stay in it or, just as bad, keep repeating myself year after year.

Kevin can put on a great radio show. He is good showman. He would have to be. I can't imagine the pressures of finding interesting guests and producing a show five nights a week. My hat is off to all of these guys, Kevin, Gene, Chris, Don, Jeff, Jeremy, Greg, and the rest who produce these podcast and radio shows that I enjoy listening to so much. They facilitate my life long fascination with the strange and the bizarre. I see them all as being in the tradition of John Keel where there is this genuine interest in the odd and the unusual combined with a sense of humor and the occasional wink and a nod.

The paranormal/UFO genre has the same problem everyone else has, the need for fresh content. We've been flogging Roswell and how many other cases to death now for how many years? So when a story comes along where a guy who has built a viking ship out of pop-sickle sticks claims to have had an encounter with a USO, how can you not think the story is worth a listen? That Kevin presented the viking ship and Norton stories in his extremely serious fashion and with accompanying drama is just all part of the show. I think this things can be appreciated for what they are but I also think because of how these things are presented (often as real events, etc.) they invite critism and should probably expect it when presenting folks like James Norton and the like. The fact that people care enough to look into it for themselves and then share their opinions, even in a contrary fashion, shows people are listening, thinking, and responding to a show they are interested in listening to. I see it as a good thing that should be embraced and used to the shows advantage. The Robbert B. shows on the Paracast being a great example of one twist on it.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Yeah, at the end of the day, if you don't like what you are hearing, turn it off. It is that simple and obviously these shows have enough listeners who are not too discerning when it comes to credible guests.
One of the very trickiest parts of all this in my opinion is that you can have people on who mix a little truth with a whole lotta shit. That can be hard work!

If you are convinced it's all bollocks then you can take it easy or switch off.
If you think a guest is telling the truth as far as they are concerned then that is all well and good.
Finally though, if someone insists on padding out truths with a pile of shite, well that can be extremely hard work - deciding if you wanna believe any of it or dismiss the lot. It is painful when you are convinced there is truth among untruth cos it lowers the credibility of the truth.

As far as hosts go though, I think Kevin Smith is a real pro and as Trainedobserver said too, I take my hat off to him. Doing as many hours a week as he does can be no mean feat. Ask Gene what is involved in doing one 2-hour show a week and multiply that by 5!

 

[Qetuoadgjl]

If you aware the person your bringing on your show is a liar, a cheat and a con artist. Is their any good reason after that to have that person back on your show once that's known to you?

So you wouldn't want a show with Dick Cheney, Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger or the Pope. roll eyes

 

[Wade]

i think all the skeptics in this forum are enjoying a good laugh when they see the "believers" (like me as well)getting caught up in debate over matters of what is and isn't real or truthful

 

[trainedobserver]

i think all the skeptics in this forum are enjoying a good laugh when they see the "believers" (like me as well)getting caught up in debate over matters of what is and isn't real or truthful

I would hope everyone is at least a skeptic of their own conclusions. That should make us all skeptics.

 

[Qetuoadgjl]

Kevin can put on a great radio show. He is good showman. He would have to be. I can't imagine the pressures of finding interesting guests and producing a show five nights a week. My hat is off to all of these guys, Kevin, Gene, Chris, Don, Jeff, Jeremy, Greg, and the rest who produce these podcast and radio shows that I enjoy listening to so much. They facilitate my life long fascination with the strange and the bizarre.

I see this kind of juvenile infatuation among those who have all but quit reading.

 

[trainedobserver]

I see this kind of juvenile infatuation among those who have all but quit reading.

Dude, you just want to fight. I don't. I'm just expressing an appreciation for the amount of work involved in creating these types of shows. I don't see why you would feel compelled to insult me for it. Juvenile eh?

When you understand what is going on and have some appreciation for it, even outlandish shows like the ice cream stick viking ship captain show, complete with drummed up cloak and dagger online interference, can be pretty entertaining. It's like watching a good or should I say so bad its good B movie. I think a great deal of the guys producing these shows have their tongues firmly planted in their cheeks much of the time. Some subjects more than others I would think.

 

[Qetuoadgjl]

Dude, you just want to fight. I don't. I'm just expressing an appreciation for the amount of work involved in creating these types of shows. I don't see why you would feel compelled to insult me for it. Juvenile eh?

You need to ask yourself why it is, DUDE, that you feel so defensive. I never claimed that you are juvenile, you might well be, I don't know enough about you, DUDE, but the term DUDE usually isn't one you find in regular use among the well educated.

DUDE.

 

[Qetuoadgjl]

When you understand what is going on and have some appreciation for it, even outlandish shows like the ice cream stick viking ship captain show, complete with drummed up cloak and dagger online interference, can be pretty entertaining. It's like watching a good or should I say so bad its good B movie. I think a great deal of the guys producing these shows have their tongues firmly planted in their cheeks much of the time. Some subjects more than others I would think.

That's where we differ. I look for information, you seek entertainment.

 

[trainedobserver]

That's where we differ. I look for information, you seek entertainment.

Then I would suggest that if you are looking for "truthful information" then places like the "Kevin Smith show" are the wrong place to look. I think there is a big inside joke to the whole public paranormal and UFO "field" that Keel and others have hinted at over the years. Any real investigation into these subjects must by necessity occur outside of the pop culture version of Ufology or any other branch of "paranormal study" represented by these shows, conferences, and so forth.

I may not be as well educated or worldly as you my friend and I do employ colloquialisms and slang when expressing myself on occasion. Again, it seems pretty clear that you are interested in presenting yourself in a contrary and insulting manner for some reason. It seems as unnecessary and counterproductive as it is uninteresting.

 

[Qetuoadgjl]

Then I would suggest that if you are looking for "truthful information" then places like the "Kevin Smith show" are the wrong place to look. I think there is a big inside joke to the whole public paranormal and UFO "field" that Keel and others have hinted at over the years. Any real investigation into these subjects must by necessity occur outside of the pop culture version of Ufology or any other branch of "paranormal study" represented by these shows, conferences, and so forth.

Here's a surprise. I don't look for facts from paranormal broadcasters.

I may not be as well educated or worldly as you my friend and I do employ colloquialisms and slang when expressing myself on occasion. Again, I it seems pretty clear that you are interested in presenting yourself in a contrary and insulting manner for some reason. It seems as unnecessary and counterproductive as it is uninteresting.

That's your perception.

 

[Wade]

I would hope everyone is at least a skeptic of their own conclusions. That should make us all skeptics.

very well said t.o.and it's this very aspect that I have wanted to start a thread on, if not for my own pursuit, and that is our complicated belief system, and the way we forment them to fit our own comfort level. I always look forward to your commenting on something I post because of your insight

 

[Walter Bosley]

Jesus, Q, LOL... If you don't look for facts on paranormal broadcasts and you express some level of disdain for those who listen for entertainment, then why are you here? I think Trained is right. You appear to be one of those looking to bicker.

Hey guys, I realized something interesting a couple of years ago: You know how on Coast To Coast (Yes, I listen a couple of times a week) there is always a caller witnessing his faith in salvation through Jesus Christ? I think the skeptic community, which is every bit as much like a faith group in its behavior, interestingly practices the same program, i.e. a freshly converted or seasoned zealot skeptic feels the need (I daresay may even be directed or influenced...) to go into the forums and divert attention from the topic or start arguments, etc etc, as a form of proselytizing. Most people I know now see the skeptic community -- meaning the proud dedicated ones and, of course, those in actual skeptic organizations -- as just like a religion or church. I find the irony amusing.

Anyway, I think it would help the paranormal audience if we would just admit that, yes, the paranormal media is primarily entertainment and everyone stop taking the truth about UFOs and ghosts and such so seriously. If it affects your personal life so deeply that you must take it so seriously, you might have to accept that it still means little to nothing for others. And that is OK, too. Now if the hardcore skeptics and their wannabes (like are found in forums...) focused their energy on politicians and the faux global warming crisis, they might actually do something productive, instead of bandying about their cleverness on such an easy target as the 'paranormal' and its more sensitive enthusiasts.

 

[trainedobserver]

I agree with your last post there Walter. I for one have changed my expectations and feelings about these things over the years. I think it only makes sense to maintain a healthy skeptical outlook in life but I don't let that hamper my appreciation for the strange and the bizarre whether that is to be found in a story or a personality. My outlook and attitude continues to go through periods of disillusionment or disenchantment concerning paranormal subjects but I'm still inexplicably drawn to them. Too many nights around camp fires telling ghost stories as a child maybe and now I'm looking to recreate that first real thrill like a junkie chasing the dragon or something.