• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Anthony Bragalia Never Sleeps...

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Christopher O'Brien said:
THE UFOS THAT NEVER WERE: CLASSIC PHOTOS NOW EXPOSED AS FAKES!
by Anthony Bragalia

That intrepid nay sayer, Anthony Bragalia (who brought you the ill-conceived Soccoro revisionist history treatment) continues his on-going series of articles that are aimed at generating rain on the ufological parade. Its a tough rain-dancing job, but somebody has to do it... right Tony?
Click to expand...

Chris, I only know of Bragalia from his Soccoro-post a few months ago, does he just 'cherry-pick' the cases he finds credible, or what? Also, wasn't he somewhat connected to Al Webre (not sure about this..)in some form or another ?
 
Hi Chris. In relation to this particular blog post, are you saying that Braglia purposely creates a red herring by revisiting events/photos already generally accepted as hoaxes? Thanks...
 
Lauren Jones said:
Hi Chris. In relation to this particular blog post, are you saying that Braglia purposely creates a red herring by revisiting events/photos already generally accepted as hoaxes? Thanks...
Click to expand...
No. the other way around. He re-visits cases thought by many to be true and attempts to debunk them.
 
Christopher O'Brien said:
Quote Originally Posted by Lauren Jones View Post Hi Chris. In relation to this particular blog post, are you saying that Braglia purposely creates a red herring by revisiting events/photos already generally accepted as hoaxes? Thanks...

No. the other way around. He re-visits cases thought by many to be true and attempts to debunk them.
Click to expand...

As a general principle, independent of Bragalia---if the cases are in fact hoaxes that are widely believed to be legitimate; it seems constructive to re-visit and critically analyze them in order to expose their falsity. Reasonable?
 
Lauren Jones said:
As a general principle, independent of Bragalia---if the cases are in fact hoaxes that are widely believed to be legitimate; it seems constructive to re-visit and critically analyze them in order to expose their falsity. Reasonable?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I suppose... Like I said, "its a tough job but somebody has to do it." Why don't you go ask Bragalia what his motivations are and report back here what you learn?
 
Christopher O'Brien said:
Yeah, I suppose... Like I said, "its a tough job but somebody has to do it." Why don't you go ask Bragalia what his motivations are and report back here what you learn?
Click to expand...

I don't have any interest in Bragalia's motivations. I follow your work and was genuinely trying to understand your point. No big deal.
 
Lauren Jones said:
I don't have any interest in Bragalia's motivations. I follow your work and was genuinely trying to understand your point. No big deal.
Click to expand...

I don't know about his motivations or beliefs or very much else about him. He could be a really nice guy. One thing I've noticed about his strategy is 'attack the character.' Witnesses are hoaxers and liars or just unpleasant people. Zamorra was allegedly so unpopular *persons unknown* made the effort to hoax his ass into the history books.

In the current blog, the only guy who's character isn't questioned is the man (Riddle) claiming Heflin told him he used a train wheel to fake his images.
 
The Spaceman photo is a jogger?!?? A jogger just happened to be running in a huge field just as the father took the picture, ... hmmmm. I don't think it is a genuine spaceman from Gleise or anything, but this conclusion, ... sheesh I don't know about that.
 
TClaeys said:
The Spaceman photo is a jogger?!?? A jogger just happened to be running in a huge field just as the father took the picture, ... hmmmm. I don't think it is a genuine spaceman from Gleise or anything, but this conclusion, ... sheesh I don't know about that.
Click to expand...

I agree. He may well be right about the other photos but his assessment of the spaceman photo is pure assumption, lacking any real research. He totally ignores the fact that there were several witnesses nearby that day and none reported seeing any person wearing a spaceman outfit or anyone else in the vicinity.. Apart from the fact that someone dressed in that way would fail to attract any attention.I suppose it could have been the ninja beekeeper.:)
 
And his summation of the Cumberland Spaceman pic also made me stop and wonder. The picture is a really odd one if you study it for a while. There was somewhere on the internet that I think showed that the "man" would have to be 12 ft tall or something to start off with. As well as the fact that the arms look to be almost double jointed or something. I can't remember the exact facts but it isn't just a jogger running behind the little girl.

So Bragalia is so wrong on that one I'm pretty sure.

ps and his language! He is always 100% sure of whether he is right over something or not. That usually means he or whoever hasn't got a leg to stand on. He might be right on minor points. But on the whole I think he is rather deluded.
 
Braglia seems to pull a lot of speculation about personal motives out of thin air.

It would be interesting for someone trained in Facial Action Coding to analyze this 2006 clip of Heflin sticking to his story. He looks sincere to me.

http://youtu.be/dNBZC1Ccklo
 
paraschtick said:
ps and his language! He is always 100% sure of whether he is right over something or not. That usually means he or whoever hasn't got a leg to stand on. He might be right on minor points. But on the whole I think he is rather deluded.
Click to expand...

I think that sums it up well. It often seems he has addition and multiplication confused. 5 + 5 does not equal 25. I see he is now certain he has figured out the motivations of yet another BS pump. In the end, he just produces more noise. Just what we need, more noise.
 
Back
Top