Brad Steiger September 30, 2012

[wwkirk]

I'm still listening to this. I am impressed with how attuned to the trickster Mr. Steiger is. Chris is in good company.

 

[Randall]

There are certain cases where it seems like the amount of strangeness in a person's life is proportional to the amount of research and/or study that they do and Brad is no exception. Every time I hear him speak he's got yet another story of something weird he has personally experienced. How many incidents can one person have in a lifetime? He's had so many that it makes me wonder if some aren't part of his marketing strategy. I know that seems like heresy. But if the paranormal has any Pope ( besides Nick Pope ) outside an organized religion ( e.g. the Raëlians ) it's got to be Brad Steiger. Now don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying Brad manufactures experiences to suit his chosen field of writing. I really don't know and I don't want to believe that because I've always enjoyed his writing. He's got a unique way of delivering his message. It's a captivating combination of storytelling and documentary ... almost but not quite a literary form of docudrama. The problem is that if nothing else, since I've joined the Paracastt I've learned how some of the people I'd previously thought were higher caliber members of the community have manufactured credentials and or stories to boost their image and careers. So I've become a victim of cynicism. Whereas in the past I'd wait for Brad with bated breath so that I could become immersed in the fascinating world he portrays, now there's this constant nagging in the back of my brain asking, "How much of this is docu and how much is drama". But again, who am I to talk? I've probably had more than my share of weird experiences as well and I'm not even on the radar compared to Steiger. So what exactly am I saying? I guess it boils down to this. What is the real relationship between paranormal experiences and the people who research them? If you are a PSI / UFO researcher, writer or enthusiast, please post a brief point form list of experiences you've had or contact me in person via my profile. Thanks!

 

[nameless]

excellent show and guest as usual. pleasure to the ear drums. thanks again gentlemen. will listen again and pick out some conversation topics.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

There are certain cases where it seems like the amount of strangeness in a person's life is proportional to the amount of research and/or study that they do and Brad is no exception. Every time I hear him speak he's got yet another story of something weird he has personally experienced. How many incidents can one person have in a lifetime? He's had so many that it makes me wonder if some aren't part of his marketing strategy. I know that seems like heresy. But if the paranormal has any Pope ( besides Nick Pope ) outside an organized religion ( e.g. the Raëlians ) it's got to be Brad Steiger. Now don't get me wrong here. I'm not saying Brad manufactures experiences to suit his chosen field of writing. I really don't know and I don't want to believe that because I've always enjoyed his writing. He's got a unique way of delivering his message. It's a captivating combination of storytelling and documentary ... almost but not quite a literary form of docudrama. The problem is that if nothing else, since I've joined the Paracastt I've learned how some of the people I'd previously thought were higher caliber members of the community have manufactured credentials and or stories to boost their image and careers. So I've become a victim of cynicism. Whereas in the past I'd wait for Brad with bated breath so that I could become immersed in the fascinating world he portrays, now there's this constant nagging in the back of my brain asking, "How much of this is docu and how much is drama". But again, who am I to talk? I've probably had more than my share of weird experiences as well and I'm not even on the radar compared to Steiger. So what exactly am I saying? I guess it boils down to this. What is the real relationship between paranormal experiences and the people who research them? If you are a PSI / UFO researcher, writer or enthusiast, please post a brief point form list of experiences you've had or contact me in person via my profile. Thanks!

To your question first, Ufology; I've had a single experience in five years of researching the paranormal that I would call...well....paranormal. I spied a shadow with no source, that moved, was witnessed by more than just myself, and manifested for approximately 20 seconds. Outside of that I've seen and captured some fair to impressive evidence, including EVPs that I hold credible (I know, a stretch for others but there you have it) and some video footage a friend caught of a shadow darting along the end of a hallway. Before my entrance into the paranormal I had zero experiences.

As far as Mr. Steiger, I found him to be an engaging and entertaining guest. That being said I don't buy into the little people/faerie folk encounters he's had throughout his life. It's a good story and as Mr. Steiger will be quick to counter it doesn't matter if I "buy" it or not. I believe that to him it happened and therefore, for him it's truth. That doesn't mean I have to believe it, though. .

I'm only about 3/4th's of the way through the interview and I was very happy that my question got asked. I 100% shared in Mr. Steiger's opinion and view of today's popculture paranormal research but it's with a hint of shame that I say that I agree with a level of hypocrisy. See, I am a product of the TV shows and new-wave paranormal entertainment. In 2006 my wife and I started watching Ghost Hunters and after I got over the drama I was hooked, but in my defense you have to understand that these shows were completely different back then. First of all they were billed as "paranormal reality shows" for a reason; the premise behind the program (Ghost Hunters at least) was these 2 ordinary guys with an ordinary job, plumbers, who did something extraordinary on the weekends...they hunted for evidence of the paranormal. They utilized electronic gadgetry and yes, mostly, they actually used critical thinking skills. I remember an early episode where Grant Wilson was in a heated argument with one of their clients when he proposed that her house was NOT haunted. He told her, "Our primary goal during an investigation is to determine that a location is not haunted. If we find evidence contrary to that, then we look at the paranormal side of it." (I'm paraphrasing). She looked at him, obviously pissed, and asked, "How many times do you do investigations where you don't find anything at all?" His reply, "Between 80 and 85%."

That conversation wouldn't happen today because 1. Grant isn't part of TAPS any more. 2. TAPS desperately seeks paranormal evidence in EVERY location, regardless of how subtle or exaggerated they have to make it (creaking boards, small breezes perceived as whispers, etc...). And 3. To the members of the paranormal public, Jason and Grant are paranormal gods. No one would "dare" question them during an investigation.

Now, of course, the show is 100% different. It's billed as a "paranormal drama" program, is no longer about 2 average joes struggling to balance family, work, and paranormal research as all "real" investigators do. Now the show is about how scary it can be, and how much fake, bull-shit evidence they can drum up. It's entertainment of a far-cheaper sort. I stopped watching it seriously around 2010 because of how disgusting it is compared to the original concept.

But I digress.... The first 2 seasons that I watched inspired me. I started paranormal investigations because of the early Ghost Hunters episodes, and I even went out to the Stanley Hotel for a ghost hunting convention where I met Jason and Grant....and J.Allen Danelek, and Rosemary Ellen Guiley, and John Zaffis, and Dave Schrader from Darkness Radio, and Kristen Sexy-Bitch who was on Ghost Hunters at the time, (I can't remember her last name, just how good she smelled. LOL!) All those paranormal celebrities. My wife and I were in heaven. That's how I got started but within 3 years or less I was dis-enchanted by the whole program and most of those people I just mentioned. Most, but not all. So yeah, I'm hypocritical about the pop-culture wave of the paranormal but at the time those programs did inject new interest into the field. You have to admit that, and it's that wave of interest that I rode to the place I am today, so I guess some good has come out of it.

At this point I'm trying to learn from the old-schoolers like Brad, but even now my filters are up. When it comes to his experiences I don't judge but I do learn. Brad's a wealth of information and experience that I can learn from, just like quite a few others. I'll take the Mike Bara episodes to learn what NOT to do if it keeps leading to more Brad Steiger episodes to learn what TO do.

~fin~

 

[Randall]

Thanks Jeff ... much appreciated. It was interesting to note that you had not had any personal encounters until after your entrance into paranormal studies. On one level I suppose that makes a lot of sense. After all if one goes looking, the chances that something will be found should increase. Shadow people encounters are pretty eerie. How did your encounter begin? What happened during the 20 seconds? How did it end?

 

[Snidely Whiplash]

I wish Steiger was the voice for Siri. Fun to listen to but I have to agree with Ufology, he probably even has a haunted out-house story.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

Thanks Jeff ... much appreciated. It was interesting to note that you had not had any personal encounters until after your entrance into paranormal studies. On one level I suppose that makes a lot of sense. After all if one goes looking, the chances that something will be found should increase. Shadow people encounters are pretty eerie. How did your encounter begin? What happened during the 20 seconds? How did it end?

You can find it here at my blog. It's sort of lengthy but I wrote the blog soon after I had it to try to record as much as possible. I understand human fallibility and the loss or exaggeration of detail over time so I figure if I record it here that will better-preserve my experience...and avoid getting things wrong in the future, even inadvertently. Let me know if you had any questions or wanted clarification about any of it.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

I wish Steiger was the voice for Siri...

LOL!

 

[Apocalypto]

Good show. Brad Steiger is always fun to listen to. And his books are great. I'm also glad to hear Chris might be collaborating with him in some way, shape or form.

I've had some ideas in my head lately and this show has inspired me to talk about them.

All of this talk of the ETH vs. Cryptozoology vs. The Multidimensional Universe vs. other ideas out there...

Here's my new thought: There are no demarcations. There are no dead zones. Our concept of living on planet Earth has affected our ability as a species to see this universe in its true form; our universe is a giant garden. There is no space in outer space. Space is a word we made up to denote the spaces between planets.

From Wiki:
"Space is the boundless, three-dimensional extent in which objects and events occur and have relative position and direction."

But it's more than that; it is all things and everything.

We define the attributes of space as zones of lifelessness and nothingness, but that is incorrect. Space is teeming with life. Beings live there. That is their home. They don't travel here. They are living here, and there. They move back and forth the same way we drive over highways at one moment, then fly through the sky at another and float over the oceans at another.

Ergo, there are - as Mr. Steiger calls them - outsiders living within our atmosphere as well as just outside of our atmosphere, as well as all over the area we call "space". They live in the air, on the ground, under the ground and in space - They live in the space between planets as well as on planets themselves.

Anyway, that's it. No demarcations. That's my new thought. Anyone care to comment?

 

[bbridges]

Good show. Brad Steiger is always fun to listen to. And his books are great. I'm also glad to hear Chris might be collaborating with him in some way, shape or form.

I've had some ideas in my head lately and this show has inspired me to talk about them.

All of this talk of the ETH vs. Cryptozoology vs. The Multidimensional Universe vs. other ideas out there...

Here's my new thought: There are no demarcations. There are no dead zones. Our concept of living on planet Earth has affected our ability as a species to see this universe in its true form; our universe is a giant garden. There is no space in outer space. Space is a word we made up to denote the spaces between planets.

From Wiki:
"Space is the boundless, three-dimensional extent in which objects and events occur and have relative position and direction."

But it's more than that; it is all things and everything.

We define the attributes of space as zones of lifelessness and nothingness, but that is incorrect. Space is teeming with life. Beings live there. That is their home. They don't travel here. They are living here, and there. They move back and forth the same way we drive over highways at one moment, then fly through the sky at another and float over the oceans at another.

Ergo, there are - as Mr. Steiger calls them - outsiders living within our atmosphere as well as just outside of our atmosphere, as well as all over the area we call "space". They live in the air, on the ground, under the ground and in space - They live in the space between planets as well as on planets themselves.

Anyway, that's it. No demarcations. That's my new thought. Anyone care to comment?

Works for me! I think we learn to filter out much of what is around us, and perhaps we need to, or we would be in a constant state of attention deficit disorder

 

[Randall]

You can find it here at my blog. It's sort of lengthy but I wrote the blog soon after I had it to try to record as much as possible. I understand human fallibility and the loss or exaggeration of detail over time so I figure if I record it here that will better-preserve my experience...and avoid getting things wrong in the future, even inadvertently. Let me know if you had any questions or wanted clarification about any of it.

A couple of questions:

1. At any time, did it move behind any object that was between you and the wall such as a support column that blocked it from your view?
2. Did it appear flat to the wall or did it appear to move out and away from the wall at any time?

 

[nameless]

Good show. Brad Steiger is always fun to listen to. And his books are great. I'm also glad to hear Chris might be collaborating with him in some way, shape or form.

I've had some ideas in my head lately and this show has inspired me to talk about them.

All of this talk of the ETH vs. Cryptozoology vs. The Multidimensional Universe vs. other ideas out there...

Here's my new thought: There are no demarcations. There are no dead zones. Our concept of living on planet Earth has affected our ability as a species to see this universe in its true form; our universe is a giant garden. There is no space in outer space. Space is a word we made up to denote the spaces between planets.

From Wiki:
"Space is the boundless, three-dimensional extent in which objects and events occur and have relative position and direction."

But it's more than that; it is all things and everything.

We define the attributes of space as zones of lifelessness and nothingness, but that is incorrect. Space is teeming with life. Beings live there. That is their home. They don't travel here. They are living here, and there. They move back and forth the same way we drive over highways at one moment, then fly through the sky at another and float over the oceans at another.

Ergo, there are - as Mr. Steiger calls them - outsiders living within our atmosphere as well as just outside of our atmosphere, as well as all over the area we call "space". They live in the air, on the ground, under the ground and in space - They live in the space between planets as well as on planets themselves.

Anyway, that's it. No demarcations. That's my new thought. Anyone care to comment?

you should look at some cubist painting. i think you would get them .

 

[Wade]

You can find it here at my blog. It's sort of lengthy but I wrote the blog soon after I had it to try to record as much as possible. I understand human fallibility and the loss or exaggeration of detail over time so I figure if I record it here that will better-preserve my experience...and avoid getting things wrong in the future, even inadvertently. Let me know if you had any questions or wanted clarification about any of it.

Incidents like this fascinate me because you went out ghost hunting and bagged yourself a shadow person. The vast majority of shadow people stories take place in the bedroom, maybe because they are just that, stories, and the bedroom location is for dramatic effect and contrawise most warehouse haunted house locations, or similar situation, would include sightings of ghosts. I have heard of a few like yours but not many.

1. Do you have any theories on a possible relationship between ghosts and shadow people ?

2. What about the fact that there seems to be a shadow person that breaks down into two seperate archetypes, the "hat man" which has achieved a meme like status (hey ! wait a minute!) and one that john keel and paul eno addressed, the checkered shirt man.

This is what is fun and frustrating about this field. Fun to think about and frustrating because working these things out in my head will keep me up all night. It would be convenient and make for better sleep to pigeonhole the two phenomena into different categories, i.e. shadowpeople are "disengaged/escaped" thoughtforms and ghosts are leftover energy formations or maybe both are of the same source
(in a different time or dimension from us but at different stages) or ghosts are energies from our past and shadow people energies from our future. I'm glad it's daytime now because be I'll be mulling this over for awhile

 

[WhiteNoise]

First of all let me say I enjoy the show. I rarely post but I've been listening to this show for years with open ears and mind. After listening to this particular show and hearing the discussion questioning the source of paranormal phenomena, I felt I should share the thoughts that come to me on this topic. In this particular show when Chris talks about how the investigator makes a decision to go right and the phenomena, seemingly with foresight, has gone left.... This trickster-ish nature reminds me of one thing. It's the exact same result you get whenever the observer is trying to observe the observer. Have you ever had a spot on your eyeball? You desperately try to see what it is that is causing the spot but because you are essentially trying to focus your eye on a part of the eye that is needed to do the focusing, you end up with the spot constantly moving out of focus. It's almost as if it knows where you're going to look and then it moves out of the way! Sounds familiar.

It is also interesting to me that science also has to wrestle with this trickster-ish behavior as it peers into the building blocks of the physical universe. In Quantum physics, we've learned that when we try to make an observation into the sub-atomic realm that the "truth" we are seeking to measure is influenced by the act of observation; Conceptually, very much like trying to focus on the spot on an eyeball. The thought that perhaps the observer is observing himself here, in physics too, is certainly there but I won't go there since that's not the intent of my post. And that's a can of worms I know.


Another example where nature does this to us is demonstrated with Godel's Incompleteness Theorem where Godel proved that no statement can prove its own truth. You always need an outside reference point. Otherwise you can end up with self referential paradoxes. So an observer is fine until he tries to observe himself. Without a reference point outside the self no proof can be developed. This "incompleteness" is true in math, science, language and philosophy. Is this what is going on with paranormal phenomena? Perhaps Chris is the eyeball trying to focus on the spot on the eyeball? It certainly seems plausible.

So if we keep going down this path, there are 4 possible explanations for any specific paranormal phenomena. As a whole it would likely be a combination of these things.

The first 3 are obvious:

1) People are lying about their experiences for money($), attention etc etc etc
2) People are crazy, delusional nut-jobs who forgot their medication. (which reminds me I need to do something after this.... )
3) People have incorrectly interpreted their experience and there is an actual non-paranormal explanation.

then

4) The phenomenon really exists but it is somehow created by an individual, group of individuals or human beings as a whole through some, as yet unknown, mechanism.

In all of these the origination of the phenomena is with humans. This explains many of the key observations I've learned about the paranormal that have been otherwise hard to explain if we're trying to get to an objective "external to human" reality for the phenomena:

1) Trickster-ish nature (as I discussed above implies the observer is observing himself)
2) Descriptions of similar types of phenomena (e.g. UFOs) differ dramatically in favor of reflecting the culture of the experiencers
3) In general, people who pay attention to the paranormal have more paranormal experiences
4) The obvious explanation for any one paranormal experience doesn't explain other types of paranormal experiences. (UFOs vs Shadow people)

This theory explains all these in my opinion.

I do not know the answer for sure. I just wanted to share some thoughts in case it might spark a thought in someone else that may be of value.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

A couple of questions:

1. At any time, did it move behind any object that was between you and the wall such as a support column that blocked it from your view?
2. Did it appear flat to the wall or did it appear to move out and away from the wall at any time?

From what I remember regarding these questions (which is pretty accurate in this case, I believe)....

1. No, there were no columns or other obstructions between me and the visual perception of the shadow nor where there any obstructions between me and the light source (the window on the wall to my left.)
2. It did appear flat to the wall...2 dimensional. I can say that it appeared more "solid" than the other shadows, as if it the source of this particular shadow was very close to the wall and farther from the light source, if that makes sense.

 

[Jeff Crowell]

Incidents like this fascinate me because you went out ghost hunting and bagged yourself a shadow person. The vast majority of shadow people stories take place in the bedroom, maybe because they are just that, stories, and the bedroom location is for dramatic effect and contrawise most warehouse haunted house locations, or similar situation, would include sightings of ghosts. I have heard of a few like yours but not many.

1. Do you have any theories on a possible relationship between ghosts and shadow people ?

2. What about the fact that there seems to be a shadow person that breaks down into two seperate archetypes, the "hat man" which has achieved a meme like status (hey ! wait a minute!) and one that john keel and paul eno addressed, the checkered shirt man.

This is what is fun and frustrating about this field. Fun to think about and frustrating because working these things out in my head will keep me up all night. It would be convenient and make for better sleep to pigeonhole the two phenomena into different categories, i.e. shadowpeople are "disengaged/escaped" thoughtforms and ghosts are leftover energy formations or maybe both are of the same source
(in a different time or dimension from us but at different stages) or ghosts are energies from our past and shadow people energies from our future. I'm glad it's daytime now because be I'll be mulling this over for awhile

Ya know, based on what I've heard about shadow people I'm not convinced this was on. First of all (like I mentioned to UFOlogy) it was 2 dimensional and most shadow folks 'appear' three dimensional. Second of all, as you mentioned yourself, this figure did not resemble the two types of shadow man typically seen, however as a side note my oldest son saw the Abraham Lincoln-type shadow figures when he was around five and six years old.

I sat in on a talk by Rosemary Ellen Guiley about shadow people once and she proposed that they were ultra-dimensional. They are also multi-cultural in scope. The answer seemed likely to me. Until one sits down with a shadow person and interviews them about their origin it's a lot of speculation, in my book.

I think it's really good that we've established a pattern regarding shadow people by gathering accounts and stories but as far as a link or connection, who knows, really. I mean my wife who's more of a believer of these types of things personally thinks they're evil, but Rosemary mentioned in her presentation that they appear to be more like observers. My wife's take is that when most shadow people appear there is an overwhelming sense of fear that sometimes accompanies them and so they somehow feed off of that that fear and emotion.

Perhaps, but my personal take on my own experience was the thing I saw was a mimik of some kind, 'blending' in to the small group to either observe or mock. I can say I wasn't afraid at all. I was quite excited and it really peaked my ghost hunting interest there for a while.

 

[Randall]

From what I remember regarding these questions (which is pretty accurate in this case, I believe)....

1. No, there were no columns or other obstructions between me and the visual perception of the shadow nor where there any obstructions between me and the light source (the window on the wall to my left.)
2. It did appear flat to the wall...2 dimensional. I can say that it appeared more "solid" than the other shadows, as if it the source of this particular shadow was very close to the wall and farther from the light source, if that makes sense.

OK thanks, so that brings us to a couple more questions:

1. Was the light coming in the window from a direct source such as the sun or a streetlamp ( whatever ) or was it reflected off another building or thing and then in through the window in the room you were in? In other words where was the primary light source?
2. Was there a place outside the window ( ground level, balcony or walkway ) where someone could walk by outside the window and cast a shadow into the room?

 

[aldo poe]

Great show loved would love to here more about the others theory

 

[Goggs Mackay]

It has been said by others before me that it seems that the more 'into' the paranormal someone gets, the more paranormal they get to experience?

It's almost as if there is some layer covering strange things that prevents the general public from seeing and understanding them, but the more you search for paranormal things, the more this layer is ineffective.
With Brad, he just gets to see the whole damned lot!

 

[Jeff Crowell]

OK thanks, so that brings us to a couple more questions:

1. Was the light coming in the window from a direct source such as the sun or a streetlamp ( whatever ) or was it reflected off another building or thing and then in through the window in the room you were in? In other words where was the primary light source?
2. Was there a place outside the window ( ground level, balcony or walkway ) where someone could walk by outside the window and cast a shadow into the room?

I like how you're thinkin' Ufology! but unfortunately you've not asked a question yet that I haven't considered and tried to use to debunk the entire encounter myself. Keep them coming.

1. The true-source of the light was street light approximately 20' in the air. There were no obstructions between the window and the light itself. It was the primary shining through the window. Additionally the light source was approximately an eighth to a quarter of a mile a way.
2. The encounter was experienced on the third floor of the building. It was a straight-drop from the window aside from a small window frame......maybe 3 inches or so.

I looked into purchasing a measuring system utilizing lasers to triangulate and measure distances but such was not cost affective for me, but I did want to know exact distances between my location, the wall, the window, and the light. Of course the one serious variable is exact locations of the other witnesses but, the time has passed for that much detail, unfortunately.