• 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!

How do you people feel about Richard Dolan

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Jimi H. said:
I enjoy listening to him (with his flawless southern diction), but I'm not sure exactly what he thinks about UFOs, except his basic approach seems to be that of the sceptic, which I like.
Click to expand...
I think he is a sceptic but not a de bunker ie he has said he has seen things which he can not explain although he looks for a scientific awnser to them.he has also said there may be no scientific awnser to some things and searches equally for that evidence
 
Seeking truth & credibility in the UFO arena is like looking for shadows in the dark. Mr. Dolan in my opinion will go just about anywhere at anytime to talk to anyone if it means he'll sell more books. This is not to say he hasn't done some good research. Even Hynek's views were biased until his kids were out of college were they not?
 
I've often thought Dolan's ufo career divides between the National Security State books 1 and 2 and everything else that follows. The follows part is where he really started to push for making the ufo thing as a full time living. That is where the slippery slope downward begins, in my estimation.
 
I see in this thread much good info. But I also see a trap we fall into repeatedly: focusing on image and personality of those presenting information instead of the information itself. Speculation about credibility and intent would be better applied to first hand witnesses.

ADD: After a moment's reflection, I see the personalities in this field are inevitably part of the fun and attraction. That's not a bad thing. But my point is not to entangle the psychology of non-witnesses with the subject matter itself.
 
Last edited:
boomerang said:
I see in this thread much good info. But I also see a trap we fall into repeatedly: focusing on image and personality of those presenting information instead of the information itself. Speculation about credibility and intent would be better applied to first hand witnesses.

ADD: After a moment's reflection, I see the personalities in this field are inevitably part of the fun and attraction. That's not a bad thing. But my point is not to entangle the psychology of non-witnesses with the subject matter itself.
Click to expand...
This thread started out asking everyone what we thought of Richard Dolan. The thread did not say that respondents had to know him personally. Everyone here has offered an opinion and for the most part given a reason. I also do not really value peoples' opinions a real lot since they are often just a projection of their psychological make-up. But as a rough illustration of peoples' image of Richard Dolan, it is valid. I also would think this type of information would be valuable for Richard Dolan. But I suspect that if he keeps getting paid to go to conferences, peoples' opinions of him will be irrelevant. I would not be surprised to someday find him in bed with Steven Greer (metaphorically, of course! However, my gaydar really pings loudly when I watch Greer giving a presentation).
 
beyondthestargate said:
This thread started out asking everyone what we thought of Richard Dolan. The thread did not say that respondents had to know him personally. Everyone here has offered an opinion and for the most part given a reason. I also do not really value peoples' opinions a real lot since they are often just a projection of their psychological make-up. But as a rough illustration of peoples' image of Richard Dolan, it is valid. I also would think this type of information would be valuable for Richard Dolan. But I suspect that if he keeps getting paid to go to conferences, peoples' opinions of him will be irrelevant. I would not be surprised to someday find him in bed with Steven Greer (metaphorically, of course! However, my gaydar really pings loudly when I watch Greer giving a presentation).
Click to expand...

Yes, the thread is admittedly about a consensus regarding Mr. Dolan. Fair game.

As for Stephen Greer's or anyone else's sexual orientation--I couldn't care less. But if there is such a thing as scamdar--Greer should activate it. :eek:
 
If anyone is going to make ufology his or her career, they better be able to take some heat about their beliefs and the people they choose to associate with. That is what I believe.
 
If one is on the 'conference circuit' and on the bill so to speak, to me it would be natural to have to spend time with the other people in the same situation (the other people on the bill). So it must be nigh impossible NOT to spend a fair amount of time with more wacky and out-there element.
So the question for me is: How easy is it for certain views to rub off on you, when you are constantly exposed to them? And even if one manages to not pick up stuff by osmosis, surely there will be a degree of guilt by association when your name is printed next to certain other names, time and time again?

But I do like RD. I tend to pay attention when he is speaking because he has undoubtedly done more'homework' than most and also I find I agree with many of his conclusions (if the source material/arguments are correct that is)
So he is definitely not a 'spent' researcher for me. I haven't yet heard him make pronouncements that others such as Greer might make. For now, RD is someone I listen to in the UFO field, but that could change, if he changes. And many do!
 
Goggs Mackay said:
If one is on the 'conference circuit' and on the bill so to speak, to me it would be natural to have to spend time with the other people in the same situation (the other people on the bill). So it must be nigh impossible NOT to spend a fair amount of time with more wacky and out-there element. So the question for me is: How easy is it for certain views to rub off on you, when you are constantly exposed to them?
Click to expand...
I speak at a few conferences and if anything, my views have become more conservative and stridently so! The more I am exposed to the weird and wacky opinions the more I recoil... Just say'in!
 
Bergen said:
I assume that going to diverse conferences of dubious nature is a must to promote books etc but after a while it seems that some ufologists get caught up in the relative fame that come with speaking at such events.
Click to expand...

I once had the same taste in my mouth, but after Dolan's last appearance on The Paracast, my tune changed slightly in his favor. My memory doesn't recall the exact conference he attended, but I do recall Dolan stating that he had become more cautious in the conventions he attends and the ufology theories he pursues. It was nice to hear, especially when you see a number of people attempting to take advantage of others.
 
I still belive he tries his best, and did so far in the past...there's still that question that lingers, why only US Americans. ?
 
Polkaroo was pretty trippy. I mean the whole show was paranormal but Polkaroo was ultra weird.
polkaroo.png
 
Christopher O'Brien said:
I speak at a few conferences and if anything, my views have become more conservative and stridently so! The more I am exposed to the weird and wacky opinions the more I recoil... Just say'in!
Click to expand...
I have studied the UFO topic for 40 years. I have had my own close contact experiences. However, I agree with Chris. At this point, I am very skeptical now of just about EVERYTHING in ufology. Things I took on faith as being true, simply because someone said so, I no longer accept at all. I feel like I have finally woken up.
 
Back
Top