• 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!

Dec 18th Tim Beckley

Free episodes:

trainedobserver

Paranormally Disenchanted
Argggh! Beckley is the guy that sells Tesla Purple Energy Plates and he speaks badly of Harry Houdini? How transparent is that? Spiritualism was a sham and Houdini did a fantastic job of demonstrating that fact again and again during an honest investigation of it. A "debunker" who needed spiritualism to make a living? What a complete misrepresentation. Beckley makes a living promoting the most bizarre claims imaginable in his line of books, pamphlets, and obvious scams like Tesla Purple Energy Plates and he has the gall to impugn the character of Harry Houdini? That is just disgusting.
 
He publishes wacky books, but doesn't necessarily agree with them. He has his own opinions and experiences, which is, of course, why he comes on.
 
He publishes wacky books, but doesn't necessarily agree with them. He has his own opinions and experiences, which is, of course, why he comes on.

I get Conspiracy Journal. I have a pretty good idea on what Beckley is about and a promoter of truth he isn't. I'm all for a good laugh at the type of material he publishes, but there is a point where the selling of things like Tesla Purple Energy Plates and such become exploitative. As such his comments were really uncalled for. As far as talent, respectability, and contributions to the understanding of the reality of paranormal claims, he isn't even in the same league as Houdini. I just found that whole segment made me yearn for a shower.
 
It the article comes under his signature as an express of what he believes or he regards as credible, yes. If he just publishes a book by someone, or publishes a newsletter with a variety of articles, you can't necessarily assume it's his point of view. Even then, you may not wish to take him seriously, but just consider the separation.
 
It the article comes under his signature as an express of what he believes or he regards as credible, yes. If he just publishes a book by someone, or publishes a newsletter with a variety of articles, you can't necessarily assume it's his point of view. Even then, you may not wish to take him seriously, but just consider the separation.

I get it Gene. I don't think you get what I'm saying in the least however.
 
I don't think Beckley really said anything harsh about Houdini. He said he made it part of his career to debate against spiritualism. If he did that that needn't be seen as an insult. Chris is who called Houdini a debunker. And even that needn't be construed as an insult.
 
I don't think Beckley really said anything harsh about Houdini. He said he made it part of his career to debate against spiritualism. If he did that that needn't be seen as an insult. Chris is who called Houdini a debunker. And even that needn't be construed as an insult.

Perhaps so. The word debunker hardly describes Houdini or Randi however, but it is a favorite jab of those who would rather not be debunked.
 
Well, well. A guy has to earn his living, I guess. And evidently, Mr Beckley does it by selling stories about the unusual and paranormal. I guess we know what that means. But he does come across very genuine regarding his own UFO experiences and even though he sells these stories, he seems to discern between the more credible ones and the crazy and/or possibly made up ones.

I guess, with the "Poltergeist" he was a little too young to be an objective observer, but it does seem interesting that his sister would have been around the "right" age of puberty. It would be interesting to know if she may have been holding something back which might have manifested as these events

His second own UFO experience was very interesting, too. You hear about these "interactive" lights from time to time, again from places like Hessdalen, and I sometimes think, well, maybe these things are just plain consciousness (Poltergeist like or whatever), playfully flying around and having fun with us earthbound creatures.

Mr. Houdini (who originally came from Germany, I believe) can definitely be called a debunker. I guess, like Randi, if you are in that business, you see too many people who want to create an air of mysticism around themselves and don't hesitate to be fraudulent about it to believe that stuff like psychic abilities really exists. As I said before, it does take observations of your own which seem to be inexplicable, to begin to wonder. I guess, Mr Houdini didn't have those.

All in all, I liked the show a lot (and not only because I got mentioned which I take as an early Christmas present). Mr Beckley does have a lot of stories, many of them to be taken with more than a grain of salt, but they are interesting. You know, here in Germany, you don't ever hear about the history of Ufology. The subject is officially non-existant.

By the way Gene, I'm not a sucker for liverwurst, but Bratwurst I like a lot. I guess you could say my outward gestalt was a little influenced by bratwurst. And beer. And Wiener Schnitzels. :rolleyes::D
 
Folks can either promote frauds or expose them. To label those who expose frauds as debunkers isn't a misuse of the term, you're right. When someone exposes spiritualists, faith healers, or psychics who prey upon the credulity, emotions, and wallets of others and promotes critical thinking I view it as a good thing.

I really don't have a problem with anyone on the show, I just found the comments incredibly, no absurdly ironic considering the circumstances and it just struck me wrong. I enjoy reading Mr. Beckley's Conspiracy Journal and have encouraged others to read the thing in more than one thread here. It's worth the trouble just for the adverts. Too funny.
 
Well, I know that often enough people take offense with something I said and I really didn't mean it that way. For my own part, I don't think that debunking is necessarily a bad thing, too.

When someone exposes spiritualists, faith healers, or psychics who prey upon the credulity, emotions, and wallets of others and promotes critical thinking I view it as a good thing.

Absolutely, and that's why we need people like James Randi and Houdini. Having said that, they (and others) are also calling people gullible and even liars who in my opinion just aren't. For example, Puthoff, Targ and the guy at King's college (I believe its called) in London who thoroughly tested Uri Geller and couldn't find any tricks. I'm not saying that Geller has never used tricks, but I also can't believe these scientists would have been so easily fooled as Randi seems to believe. I think, similar to some UFO contactees, there once was something genuine, but then they wanted too much.

Same with spiritualism. I can't say that I feel it was (or is, for spiritualism is alive and kicking) all bunk. Not after my own observations which seem to indicate that "spirits" or "the soul" are indeed more than just myths. I think that William James did find the "white crow" he was speaking of, which would mean that - speaking for me personally of course - there were (are) "real" psychics (but I doubt that things like materialization of "ectoplasm" are real). But of course there must have been lots of fake psychics (again, some of whom may have had some ability once but lost it growing up or whatever) and these guys deserved to be exposed (the Society for Psychical Research was doing that if I remember correctly).

Speaking of spirits. The little argument Chris had with Mr Beckley about demons and jinns had me thinking. I guess, they were both right. Before they were "demonized" by the catholic church (I guess they came up with it), "demons" (the word coming from ancient greek I believe) were nothing more than "spirits" (who could be evil, indifferent or even benevolent). So, in that historical sense I think Mr Beckley was right to put them in the same drawer. But as these christian scholars in the middle ages would call everything evil that wasn't christian, these heathen "daimones" became the more sinister and all-out-evil guys of today who can't be compared to the djinn any more.

In my opinion, words like "demons", "Spirits", "djinn" or whatever might all be names for the same class of real phenomena observed by our ancestors. That's why I think they might even be the cause of those "interactive balls of light" seen in Hessdalen and other places.
 
Geller is a complete and utterly absurd character. His ability to fool people is a practiced art that has nothing whatsoever to do with the paranormal though. I'm absolutely astounded that anyone fell for the toaster healers antics, although I am aware that many have and still do apparently. Scientists are only as good as their design of experiments allow and not all are created equal, as I'm sure you would agree.

I think it is important to separate anomalous phenomena (that I do think exists b.t.w.) from human beings who exploit others beliefs about the anomalous for their own gain. I think that Geller is just one in a long list of those characters.
 
LOL Strange things happening on the paracast forums.

Geller is a complete and utterly absurd character.

He is today, no doubt. But I just can't imagine that Russell Targ, Hal Puthoff, Edgar Mitchell and Dr Taylor (from King's College in London) didn't suspect him o be a fraudster and observed him VERY closely. And they all say that there was no way he could have tricked them. So what the heck...?

http://www.urigeller.com/books/geller-papers/g19.htm

Just wondering. But I'm afraid you might be right...

I think it is important to separate anomalous phenomena (that I do think exists b.t.w.) from human beings who exploit others beliefs about the anomalous for their own gain. I think that Geller is just one in a long list of those characters.

Yeah, I absolutely agree. But I wonder now (which I didn't before my own observations) if there can't yet be some people who do have talents to pick up these phenomena (like psychics).
 
But I just can't imagine that Russel, Targ, Mitchell and Taylor (the guy from King's College in London) didn't suspect him o be a fraudster and observed him VERY closely. And they all say that there was no way he could have tricked them. So what the heck...?

But shouldn't we be able to imagine them being fooled by a professional illusionist. Particularly an illusionist who already had them believing the trick was real? I believe a tremendous tell to the fraudulent nature of his alleged abilities is their presentation and use.

But I wonder now (which I didn't before my own observations) if there can't yet be some people who do have talents to pick up these phenomena (like psychics).

There may be individuals with true psychic powers but would they be doing essentially parlor tricks with them? Mentalists can make you believe they are incredible psychics. It's an art form.

Also, I will admit that if you take the video you've posted at face value it is impressive. However, it's difficult to gauge actually how well it represents what actually occurred.
 
But shouldn't we be able to imagine them being fooled by a professional illusionist.

Guess we should. I admit that I don't want to.

Particularly an illusionist who already had them believing the trick was real?

Well, I don't know about that. I can't imagine a scientist who would be that easily convinced by claims that are so evidently contradicting physical laws and common sense..

There may be individuals with true psychic powers but would they be doing essentially parlor tricks with them?

Well, they were young and otherwise untalented and they needed the money...:D No, I'm afraid you're right again. I sure don't trust any of these self-proclaimed psychics who try to be in the news or in front of a camera as often as possible. But I do think that there may have been some genuine people who came to be known and then - when they had a bad day or maybe when their abilities got weaker or failed altogether for some reason - turned to tricks and fraud because they didn't know what else to do.

Oh well. Call me a believer if you will ;) .
 
Thanks for the vid. To be honest, I find it quite hard to decide who is the more absurd character of these two. I mean, if I go to see a magician, I actually don't want him to tell me "hey guys I know it looks all kinda magical n mystical but it's all just trickery and sleight-of-hand". I wouldn't think he (or she) is really doing something paranormal but I'd enjoy the mystical mumbo-jumbo nonetheless. And I think 99% of the audience would do likewise. So Criss Angel is kind of undermining the foundations of his own profession, I guess.

But of course it all changes when the magician claims to have real paranormal abilities. Then I would stop enjoying the atmosphere and demand irrefutable proof. Which Geller never was able to produce with this challenge or Randi's One Million dollars or with Johnny Carson etc. etc.

Man. I wish I could have been a fly on the wall when these SRI tests went down. But I think that case is closed. No paranormal things going on with Uri and his aliens from Hoobah (or whatever its called).
 
Back
Top