• 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!

Covert Disinformation behind some UFOlogists

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Quite a few people around here have been called disinfo. agents at sometime or another. Only for questioning woo woo concepts. Last person who called me one did so because I mentioned Billy Meier is a fraud and that I have severe doubts about Bob Dean. Oh, and I asked questions involving a ufo sighting they had that made no sense to me.
 
I believe UFO disinfo is well done and its hard to detect, they have alot of money, and resources to make up fake UFO books and guests, to muddy the waters.

It is my opinion that if you found out all the intell payrolled researchers in all of UFOlogy there would be some of your favorite authors included.

When will we start submitting people to lie detetions to flush out the bunk.
 
I tell him, for example, that Corsco was legit
Click to expand...

Did you say Costco was legit? I thought they might be a front for the mob.
How do they get all those big flat screen TVs so cheap? I think you should reconsider.;)
 
Zandroid said:
When will we start submitting people to lie detetions to flush out the bunk.
Click to expand...

Ok wait Zandroid. Lie deteCtions at what point? Every time they appear on a broadcast? To get a 'Truthful UFO Researcher' license of some sort?

Who would administer these tests? And where?

And polygraphs have proven to be unreliable in many instances.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for separating the wheat from the chaff, but maybe open exposure and ridicule (i.e., places like The Paracast - The Paranormal's Polygraph - wink, wink), are much better.

Just think, some bozo that you know is a BS'er could possibly pass a polygraph and then we would have to deal with that. No thanks.

Think of this, what if someone is a pathological liar, and I'll just throw out some names for example (not that they are pathological liars) -- but say for the sake of this hypothetical argument they are. Bill Knell, Billy Meiers. Ok, if they were pathological liars, then they could very possibly pass a polygraph because they would often actually believe their own lies as they are speaking them, and the polygraph would not detect any biological anomalies.

Sorry to beat that down. Just don't think it is a good idea. A polygraph can be used in certain circumstances when the issue is narrow and a focused investigation can be done, but not as some general litmus test.
 
Its because of these sort of instances that I keep away from the "conspiracy" side of the ufo business. every time theres a whole load of "he said this, they met here, and, A says B is a disinfo agent". I mean, it seems to me that everyone has been called disinfo at some point...

I'm just trying to say that as we dont know whats going on at all, we cant even begin to speculate on what the goverment has said (or anyone claiming to be from a goverment organisation). All we can rely on is facts, wether that be from evidence or sightings or careful mapping of experience.

Remember, all of this may have nothing to do with spaceships, the govement or even actual physical (as we would describe them) events.

Theres even the possibility that the whole thing is disinfo, a kind of wind 'em up and watch 'em go type scenario.

I dunno...:confused:
 
bobheck said:
Ok wait Zandroid. Lie deteCtions at what point? Every time they appear on a broadcast? To get a 'Truthful UFO Researcher' license of some sort?

Who would administer these tests? And where?

And polygraphs have proven to be unreliable in many instances.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for separating the wheat from the chaff, but maybe open exposure and ridicule (i.e., places like The Paracast - The Paranormal's Polygraph - wink, wink), are much better.

Just think, some bozo that you know is a BS'er could possibly pass a polygraph and then we would have to deal with that. No thanks.

Think of this, what if someone is a pathological liar, and I'll just throw out some names for example (not that they are pathological liars) -- but say for the sake of this hypothetical argument they are. Bill Knell, Billy Meiers. Ok, if they were pathological liars, then they could very possibly pass a polygraph because they would often actually believe their own lies as they are speaking them, and the polygraph would not detect any biological anomalies.

Sorry to beat that down. Just don't think it is a good idea. A polygraph can be used in certain circumstances when the issue is narrow and a focused investigation can be done, but not as some general litmus test.
Click to expand...

All you need, is to get Paola Harris, or Linda MH. to sit down with whoever and read their body language. Yes, they can tell the truth, because they think they can. Nevermind that people who think they can read people aren't rich..... (Go to Vegas) they have more impotent things to do, like impress the gullible.
 
bobheck said:
Think of this, what if someone is a pathological liar, and I'll just throw out some names for example (not that they are pathological liars) -- but say for the sake of this hypothetical argument they are. Bill Knell, Billy Meiers.
Click to expand...


Add Bush to that.
 
Stillborn said:
All you need, is to get Paola Harris, or Linda MH. to sit down with whoever and read their body language. Yes, they can tell the truth, because they think they can. Nevermind that people who think they can read people aren't rich..... (Go to Vegas) they have more impotent things to do, like impress the gullible.
Click to expand...


People actually believed Bush Jr.

No seriously they actually did.
 
The UFO field does not need 'disinfo' agents. There are quite enough whackos in the field to do the job for the government without the government lifting a finger. I believe the government has taken on the UFO field in the past, but that it has no heavily-funded program today because the mission to dicredit UFOs has been successful. I am referring to the dissolution of NICAP, which I bellieve was a CIA operation.

All you need today to discredit the UFO field is these guys: http://www.ufowatchdog.com/shame.html. The list posted above is complete crap compiled by someone with serious personal issues. The way people within the UFO field accuse each other of being disinfo agents is sloppy and beneath scholarship and contempt.
 
Sigh...

We just finished an "interview" with Stephen Bassett, where he stated that he reached out to Jeff Peckman to be part of his X-Conference because he was a credible media darling. Just like Paola Harris.

Yeah, this field is screwed beyond repair. I'm of the mind that we'll never get to the bottom of this situation, but instead, lots more morons will step up and fill the gap left by credible people who decide that they don't need much more of this nonsense.

dB
 
David Biedny said:
Sigh...

We just finished an "interview" with Stephen Bassett, where he stated that he reached out to Jeff Peckman to be part of his X-Conference because he was a credible media darling. Just like Paola Harris.

Yeah, this field is screwed beyond repair. I'm of the mind that we'll never get to the bottom of this situation, but instead, lots more morons will step up and fill the gap left by credible people who decide that they don't need much more of this nonsense.

dB
Click to expand...

So you have recorded 'that' interview, where you let Bassett have it?
 
David Biedny said:
Sigh...

We just finished an "interview" with Stephen Bassett, where he stated that he reached out to Jeff Peckman to be part of his X-Conference because he was a credible media darling. Just like Paola Harris.

Yeah, this field is screwed beyond repair. I'm of the mind that we'll never get to the bottom of this situation, but instead, lots more morons will step up and fill the gap left by credible people who decide that they don't need much more of this nonsense.

dB
Click to expand...

i am none the less convinced, that people like Mr Steinberg, and yourself and the way in which you approach the subject are the "historians" the future will turn to as good sources of data.
the latest episode for example was an excellent case "history" as are so many of the Paracasts shows.

Chin up mate, its rare that truly worthwhile things come easy.

there are lots of sites and shows presenting the data, but very few whos obvious policy is to sort the wheat from the chaff. truly a Diamond amongst the Coal
 
That's very sweet of you, Mike. Sometimes I really feel that this is just a complete waste of my time, but then I remember, people like Bassett ride along the fringes of this phenomenon, wanting to be part of it in the worst way. In contrast, I've got a lifetime of experiences that have drawn me in, without me asking. He's crashing the party, I'm holding an unsolicited invitation.

dB
 
Word is, that if someone is a sanctioned 'disinfo agent' the key question to ask them (or find out) is whether they file 1040 or 1099 on their taxes. Think about it.

Also, to Nethawk- who proposed that 99% of people who call BS on questionable claims are paid for it- WHERE'S MY CHECK????

And for that matter, Mr. Biedny and Mr. Steinberg must have a windfall coming :D

btw- Tommy Allison, nice call on Paladin. Its disconcerting that more people don't see right through them.
 
371 said:
Word is, that if someone is a sanctioned 'disinfo agent' the key question to ask them (or find out) is whether they file 1040 or 1099 on their taxes. Think about it.
Click to expand...

John Lear has always claimed he was a contract employee for the CIA, not an employee of the agency itself, therefore he would be filing a 1099 unless he worked for a company that contracted with the CIA, in which case he would file a 1040 anyway. When faced with the phrase, "Once CIA, always CIA" he says, "Not for a contract employee." Not that I give credence to Lear; we have a mildly antagonistic relationship with one another. He invites me to his ranch, and then insults me. Or is it vice versa? I'm not going.

I have a good friend who has worked for an agency that does not exist both while in the military and as a civilian and has always filed a 1040. There is no direct connection between he and the agency that does not exist. These things can get murky, and it's not even intentional. It's just the way it works. Myself, I have traditionally filed both a 1099 and a 1040 for the same year. The answer to the question is not going to tell you anything definitive.

I'd like my check sent to my PayPal account, please.
 
Well since we are all pointing at CIA in this thread I thought I'd link this interesting article:

"...[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]it’s okay to say that the CIA is hiding little green men, but when you say the CIA has concocted the story of little green men, the CIA hunts you down…"[/SIZE][/FONT]
A Lone Chemist's Quest to Expose the UFO Cover-up

It's unfortunate he does not include references in his articles but he still might make for an interesting guest.
 
Back
Top