• 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!

Blake Cousins (Twins Who Shall Not Be Named -- TWSNBN)

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Goggs Mackay said:
we gotta trailer park boys fan here which is great..:)
Click to expand...

Absolutely! :D That's one of my all time favorite shows!

3qpf5c.jpg
 
Konrad Hartmann said:
What are your credentials in these fields? I'm not asking to be a wisenheimer; I'm just curious.
Click to expand...

Konrad. Exposing my academic credentials on a forum is not exactly my concept of intellectual accomplishment (but if there is an absolute necessity,I am willing to provide you a link to my profile on Academia.edu - Share research, although I am concerned with privacy issue). I realize it was a pretty bad idea to post on this forum. My initial motivation was to discuss issues related to ufology & "alternative research", not to use this forum as a barometer for egocentric activity.
 
Even though it's safe to say this guy is a charlatan his idea of a huge mix of videos in one spot is not a bad one. From my limited understanding of ufology any credible evidence is immediately sucked down the Bigelow black hole never to been seen by the unwashed masses. Either that or taken by government agencies and also never seen again. I'm in no way defending him but the motto about letting the people decide is all some of us are left with since most of the researchers and organizations are bought off. Even George Knapp admitted he belonged to Bigelow.
 
Fcseven said:
Even though it's safe to say this guy is a charlatan his idea of a huge mix of videos in one spot is not a bad one. From my limited understanding of ufology any credible evidence is immediately sucked down the Bigelow black hole never to been seen by the unwashed masses. Either that or taken by government agencies and also never seen again. I'm in no way defending him but the motto about letting the people decide is all some of us are left with since most of the researchers and organizations are bought off. Even George Knapp admitted he belonged to Bigelow.
Click to expand...

Great point. The only hope for something real is a place like this where any person can load a video without answering to Chris and Gene or other thought police types - or sending it to some organization to be stolen by NSA goons.
 
nameless said:
You confuse bitterness with passionately pissed off. some of us here are kind of sick of the dog and pony show that kids are lapping up as fact.
Like the dude said in the show, if your access to a phenomena or a subject of study is limited to a crass money controlled woo woo portal, your going to grow up with some crazy ideas.

Let me use the analogy of "hip hop". Kids today actually think hip hop is a form of music that kanye west makes. Why? Because they are not aware of hip hop history and culture, and because MTV and business men sold the most marketable element of the culture ie. rap music to kids as the culture and defined it as the whole culture. Kids who are outside the culture with impetus and no direction found that the voice they could have had experientially had been co-opted by a corporate conglomerate.

Project Camelot, Sirius Cseti, the disclosure project , David Ickes, dan brown.......

So yeah I am pissed off that people can take a subject which requires serious study and can be dry and boring and plain and turn it into ridicule and entertainment and a money making ego trip. Particularly as people have dedicated, time, money, relationships, mental health, friendship and life in search of the truth. So yeah it's a big fucking deal.

It certainly comes across as "you pesky kids" but Its an opinion , not an argument, and its not devoid of the fact that yes, we were the kids are parents warned us about.

But that's ironically the point gene and Chris were making.
Do your home work. Read. Understand the difference between reality and fantasy. Remember the college is invisible and there are a lot of false tutors. Perhaps then you won't be doomed to repeat the same mistakes that we did.


Anyway can you take this guy seriously in this field when he said "I don't know who you are" to gene and Chris . Do your fucking home work fool.ufo 101.ffs
Click to expand...


New to the forums, so I'm sorry if the quoted style is wrong.

Anyways, this is more or less the problem with getting 'young people' into the field. I've heard Mr. Steinberg and Mr. O'Brien speak often about how the average age of the UFO conventions is around 98 or so....Look guys. I'm 30. I've been interested in the UFO field since I was a kid...But, there is 60 or so years of information to dig through at this point. Some of it is straight laced military reports, some contactee weirdness, some the 'errythang is connected' multiverse/paranormal explanation. To be sure, a bit of each is part of the solution, but it's a lifetimes worth of material to review.
There are no High School or College courses to take on the subject. There is no guide to the hucksters and researchers. There are very few people in the field with sterling background. It's a mess of hear-say, conjecture, theory and lies. Some out-right bold faced lies. Yet again, it would take years to sift through all the material to come to a conclusion.
I'm not saying Cousins is right or wrong. I'm impartial as I don't think random lights in the sky mean anything. Yes, he could convince some people the entire field is bunk. Yes, he could bring out a gaggle of 'true-believers'. Either way, those that really care will look deeper and come to some understanding of the topic, be it a technological/multi-dimensional/psychological approach. Again, I don't condone what he's doing, but I think it's not much different than 'Sightings' from back when I was a kid.
But to the point. If you guys really want a new generation of researchers to come out of the wood works, it's probably best to let them make mistakes. Let them learn a bit. Let them fall down and let them ask for help. We aren't born educated and wise. It takes time to build that up. I'm sure if you dug deep enough that the teenager researchers in the 40's and 50's were just as over-zealous as we can be.
 
The ""Twins Who Shall Not Be Named" (TWSNBN) aren't kids. They are around 40, based on what we can determine. When I was 40, I wasn't faking UFO videos, or sightings. We all did foolish things as teenagers, of course, and Jim Moseley and Gray Barker were older (late 20s, late 30s) when they pulled some of their famous stunts. But young people can only learn if you put good information in front of them. If they are presented with silly hoaxes, they will simply conclude that's what UFOs are all about and move on.
 
Which is why I listen to this show :D. Good information is hard to come by. I'm just saying, with some people it takes longer than others and no path is short. Again, I'm not defending what they do....I'm not a fan of it at all. I just wanted to share my opinion on the topic and younger people getting into the field. For every researcher like Chris O'Brien there is bound to be a P.T. Barnum like the Cousins Brother, Sister Wives, whatever they're called.
 
So, I know Chris called out Richard Dolan, among others, for being on Blake's channel. I briefly chatted with Rich about this, and while I by no means claim to speak for the man, he did say that the interview request came at him rather quickly and abruptly and he just sort of quickly said yes, and he didn't look into the man. I know after he learned about Blake's operation later on, he regretted doing the interview and was angry about it. He's a busy guy, and I can see where he's coming from. He said he didn't give a shit about him then and still doesn't. I doubt he will be appearing on the man's channel a second time :).
 
WillVicious said:
New to the forums, so I'm sorry if the quoted style is wrong.

Anyways, this is more or less the problem with getting 'young people' into the field. I've heard Mr. Steinberg and Mr. O'Brien speak often about how the average age of the UFO conventions is around 98 or so....Look guys. I'm 30. I've been interested in the UFO field since I was a kid...But, there is 60 or so years of information to dig through at this point. Some of it is straight laced military reports, some contactee weirdness, some the 'errythang is connected' multiverse/paranormal explanation. To be sure, a bit of each is part of the solution, but it's a lifetimes worth of material to review.
There are no High School or College courses to take on the subject. There is no guide to the hucksters and researchers. There are very few people in the field with sterling background. It's a mess of hear-say, conjecture, theory and lies. Some out-right bold faced lies. Yet again, it would take years to sift through all the material to come to a conclusion.
I'm not saying Cousins is right or wrong. I'm impartial as I don't think random lights in the sky mean anything. Yes, he could convince some people the entire field is bunk. Yes, he could bring out a gaggle of 'true-believers'. Either way, those that really care will look deeper and come to some understanding of the topic, be it a technological/multi-dimensional/psychological approach. Again, I don't condone what he's doing, but I think it's not much different than 'Sightings' from back when I was a kid.
But to the point. If you guys really want a new generation of researchers to come out of the wood works, it's probably best to let them make mistakes. Let them learn a bit. Let them fall down and let them ask for help. We aren't born educated and wise. It takes time to build that up. I'm sure if you dug deep enough that the teenager researchers in the 40's and 50's were just as over-zealous as we can be.
Click to expand...

Hello fellow 30-something! :p

I agree, there is a LOT of information to digest. Follow just one or two topics and you could find yourself lost in a sea of details, reports, articles, etc. I also agree when you say let them make mistakes. I think that the problem here is that the Over the Moon brothers already had that learning opportunity, and they don't seem to be actually learning from it. The way B-Moon handled Chris and Gene showed that he isn't genuinely interested in learning or devoting anymore time to the research side of things. He just wants to stay the course and rake in the green.

They are getting some big names involved, going on popular radio programs, claiming to have certain backgrounds and basically posturing themselves as some kind of authority on paranormal video content. When you are going to put yourself out there in front of the public eye, you are opening yourself up to scrutiny. And people WILL call you out if you are doing the wrong thing - especially if you are also doing it for the wrong reasons.

I write and when I put something out there, I get feedback. I don't always like it, either. If I wasn't prepared to listen and learn then I shouldn't have put myself out there in the first place. I genuinely want to grow as a writer, so I listen and do my best to improve. I don't get huffy and argue or state the title of my book over and over again to drown out the criticism. I gather what valuable tidbits I can and see where that takes me.

Maybe its the way they sound, but these guys aren't kids. They are adults and if they are in it for the fame and fortune then they need to man up and own it because not doing so appears deceptive. Otherwise they would have probably jumped on the idea of getting outside advice. Or at the very least wouldn't be calling Chris a jerk off. And all that without mentioning the fact that they may be hoaxing many of the videos themselves. :oops:
 
Having just had a chance to listen to the show, finally, I think the way Gene and Chris handled Blake was admirable. Yes, they criticized him, but as others have said, that's what happens when you put yourself out there, and for all the ridiculous crap that finds its way onto that channel, and then gets touted as "the real deal," I think they were pretty mild and their criticism was generally constructive. If Blake would've done a modicum of research about the show and its hosts, he would've known that two people who have devoted a lot of time and energy into this field, like Gene and Chris, would have some strong opinions on what he was doing.

Going by how he has behaved since an offer of help and some potential guidance was extended his way, you can tell that he's not interested in improving the quality of the videos and potentially educating people, he would rather just throw a bunch of trash at them and hope it catches their eye. I don't think Blake has one iota of real interest in this field, other than how much money he can siphon off of gullible true believers.

All in all, it was an interesting episode and it shows exactly why I like the Paracast, they are one of the only shows out there that will call out the frauds, maybe they don't call out all of them, but when it comes to the major slimeballs in this field, (and I would put Blake in that category) I think they get it right most of the time.

EDIT:

I forgot to say, wtf was up with the letter from the disgruntled listener in the beginning? I don't think I've ever heard what I would call bad language used on the show and I can't remember the last time I heard Chris tell a joke. Gene has his own method of segue that can be interpreted as joking, but other than some bad puns, what is there to get upset about? Sounds to me like someone has a bug up their ass for no good reason...
 
TheDevilCanDance said:
Konrad. Exposing my academic credentials on a forum is not exactly my concept of intellectual accomplishment (but if there is an absolute necessity,I am willing to provide you a link to my profile on Academia.edu - Share research, although I am concerned with privacy issue). I realize it was a pretty bad idea to post on this forum. My initial motivation was to discuss issues related to ufology & "alternative research", not to use this forum as a barometer for egocentric activity.
Click to expand...

I totally understand the privacy concerns, Devil; I was just wondering what you worked on. I just recently discovered Academia.edu and I recommend that people check it out. I'm trying to find more material on there about the Gravettian period.
 
I listened to the interview with Blake. There is no way I would go to his site. The first thing I look for is some credibility in UFO research, and a site with funny lights in the sky, which has not been authenticated is just a waste of time. I found Blake pretty unconvincing, and thought you guys would tear into him a lot more, afterall, the guy's site has no credibility in the world of ufology. Goggs' suggestion was a good one, but I seriously doubt Blake will do what The Paracast has suggested. I've met people like Blake, and believe me they are a waste of time.

- Digital_Archivist
 
Konrad Hartmann said:
I totally understand the privacy concerns, Devil; I was just wondering what you worked on. I just recently discovered Academia.edu and I recommend that people check it out. I'm trying to find more material on there about the Gravettian period.
Click to expand...

Konrad.Thank you.I am not specialized in palaeoanthropology or Palaeolithic, but if you have a particular interest in the Gravettian period, I might be able to help you finding documents.I am fluent in French & have access to a wide range of academic publications.You may contact me through my Facebook account (I have a link in my profile) if you wish so.
 
Back
Top