Jan 18th - Leo Sprinkle

[Frozen E.T. Burrito]

without condition.

Ok, well yeah, I would NEVER suggest "without conditions". Just dont be too quick to let those things get in the way of also seeing a more abstract potential value to a persons presentations. Like, if you find a "gotcha" with the guy, that doesn't mean that, holistically and potentially abstractly speaking, there isn't a gold mine of value being communicated in addition to what you are pre-looking for.

Conditions are definitely our friends... :shy:

 

[Blacknight]

...

But I think at this point, for the informed individual it's pretty much beyond debate that there is at least one organization within the US government/military which has *much* more information about the ufo subject than the general public.

I think it's also pretty clear that this organization has travelled beyond the reach of governmental oversight...

I don't know if there is any way to make this organization spill the beans. Then again, if investigating this subject was made a higher priority by those in our government, perhaps there would be a greater chance of eventually extracting information from this organization.

How would one get a secret government organization, about which no one knows even the name, members or location to ever be forthcoming with information the evidence of which information's existence does not, itself, exist? It is cotton candy in the rain.

 

[BrandonD]

How would one get a secret government organization, about which no one knows even the name, members or location to ever be forthcoming with information the evidence of which information's existence does not, itself, exist? It is cotton candy in the rain.

I think it would be nearly impossible for *no one* to know the name, members or location of this organization (or organizations). I think it would be more logical to assume that knowledge about this organization is scattered and fragmented among various people in the government and military. As long as this information remains scattered and fragmented, then I would agree that probably nothing can be done.

But, if investigation of the ufo phenomenon was made higher priority by those in the government, then maybe we could make some headway in bringing these fragmented pieces of information together to make a more coherent picture.

 

[Frozen E.T. Burrito]

I think it would be nearly impossible for *no one* to know the name, members or location of this organization (or organizations).

I know where some good leads are though... it just occurred to me yesterdy while watchin the inauguration on Hulu, that it would be interesting to study who all is sitting immediately around the new president on all the inaugurations, and see if there are patterns. I aint got time right now though...

 

[dusty]

Only just heard the show today,

I thought Dr Sprinkle was a great guest. Sure he may be a little out of touch and
seemingly easily convinced on occasion, (he was even happy to be considered someone who's brain had already fallen out) but I liked the fact that he can laugh at himself and to me that's a strength.

However, behind that easy going nature there seems to me at least to be a man
with a great sensitivity for what I guess one might call The Bigger Picture.
I liked his approach and ways of thinking, and feel that what he has to say about the whole topic, might too some on first look, seem to be a little less than critical.
But as he says himself, he is most interested in learning and sharing information. Also he doesn't strike me as someone who feels he has any answers yet to the questions we all like to ask, but is enjoying the search for perhaps the right questions.
And man you have to admire his stamina. Check out what he said about the way he was treated by his former employer, after he was told to stop doing research into reincarnation, over on Jeremy's COC show.

What he was saying about build up, good and evil, the bulldogger and hazer and seeking truth in the middle, and that in his opinion this will be the way of things for some time to come, makes a lot of sense to me.
It looks like Dr Sprinkle, you and me have already made our minds up about the reality
of ufo's and non humans. So looking beyond that at things like the spiritual evolution of man as being important to further our understanding seems logical to me.

One other thing, the comments he made about the Indian Space Agency's proposed moon shot interested me as well. Not for what he then went on to say about finding Alien bases, but because only a couple of days ago I came across this article by accident.

http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/4298.asp

I wanted to ask everyones opinion on what it says. It unfortunately seems to be unattributed and to be quite honest I dont really understand the physics behind such a suggestion. For all I know this could have come from someone like Sereda but I thought you might find it interesting.

Anyway Great show again guys and I hope you do get him back on again,

Mark

 

[Schuyler]

To make such a statement on that thread of evidence really cuts into my belief in this guy's reasoning ability. Sorry.

I'm not saying I don't like him and would not have him over for checkers. But as a credible paranormal researcher, not happening for me.

Am I all alone here? If so, OK -- so be it. If not, somebody throw me a bone, will ya? Or help me understand what I don't understand about this guest.

You are not alone. Thank you for transcribing that portion. The whole idea is based on faulty research, which Sprinkle accepts as fact. He then makes an incredible leap to Mars and suggests humans may have come from there. I realize he is couching his words with words like 'may' instead of 'did' to give him an out. (Some would call those weasel words.) He's speculating far out of his field and ignoring the evidence we do have. We've got human evolution back through Homo Erectus, period. Things get more sparse as we move further back, but everything credible we do have points to a earthly origin of our species. I'm not saying we couldn't have been 'tweaked' along the way, but it seems to me speculating a Martian origin of our species is a credulous misstatement.

The thing is, we like to pride ourselves on our skepticism here. We pride ourselves in our mental acuity and ability to detect falsehoods. If someone like Dr. Richard Boylan, another PhD psychologist, had said something like this, we'd be all over it in a second. But Sprinkle gets a pass because he's a 'nice guy,' whatever that means. I think the kind of statement you printed reflects fuzzy thinking on his part, and it calls into question the rest of what he has to say, which in most cases is highly philosophical, not anything with a factual basis. Frankly, I got a lot more insight about what our hosts had to say this time, particularly David, than I did our guest.

 

[David Biedny]

Schuyler, it's no secret that I deeply respect your opinion. I'm wondering, what insights into me did you get from this episode? Am I a gullible twit, a two-faced moron, for not biting Sprinkle's head off?

Should this episode spell the end for the show?

Because I'm trying to be a bit less harsh with those that I don't suspect are engaging in out-and-out damaging fraud. I realize that there are lots of opinions about this stuff, I Gene & I certainly have no exclusive access to truth here. Hell, I just got a PM accusing me of being a "raging liberal" and asshole.

So please share your insights, I'm genuinely curious. Should I throw in the towel?

dB

 

[Blacknight]

But, if investigation of the ufo phenomenon was made higher priority by those in the government, then maybe we could make some headway in bringing these fragmented pieces of information together to make a more coherent picture.

People will be losing jobs at unprecedented rates, inflation will run rampant within 3 years, all while we build monumental deficits and battle terrorism on multiple fronts. The last words that will come out of a very smart President Obama's mouth for the foreseeable future will be "UFO" and "disclosure". In the best of times, "disclosure" never makes even a minor blip on the radar of public concern.

I'd put the whole "disclosure" discussion into suspended animation for some time to come. Windmill tilting takes courage but it shouldn't step over the line into self-immolation.Perhaps some day, but not any day soon!

 

[bobheck]

Schuyler, it's no secret that I deeply respect your opinion. I'm wondering, what insights into me did you get from this episode? Am I a gullible twit, a two-faced moron, for not biting Sprinkle's head off?

Should this episode spell the end for the show?

Because I'm trying to be a bit less harsh with those that I don't suspect are engaging in out-and-out damaging fraud. I realize that there are lots of opinions about this stuff, I Gene & I certainly have no exclusive access to truth here. Hell, I just got a PM accusing me of being a "raging liberal" and asshole.

So please share your insights, I'm genuinely curious. Should I throw in the towel?

dB

I know you were talking to Schuyler here but I gotta jump in. For God sakes no, not at all. This is not the end and don't throw in the towel. And there is no need to be harsh with a guest such as Dr. Sprinkle.

When I wrote the post about the Mars thing I was actually pointing out the fact that his reasoning behind one of the claims I chose to shine a light on was really really shallow. And, a few others wrote that they didn't think he actually believed that strongly what he said, or that he said it in passing manner. I was just trying to illuminate that he did not say it lightly and he meant all of it, based on what i thought was very poor reasoning.

I was just trying to discuss and dissect, if you will, the last episode. That's it.

I did not mean for this to take a turn anything like where it is going, which is starting to sound like insinuations that the host should have been more harsh, or bit his head off or something. Not so. It was said in retrospect. In the future I will have to heavily weigh anything I hear from Dr. Leo Sprinkle.

David, you and Gene have talked about previous shows yourselves with a sharper tongue than you had during the show, after having had time to digest what was said. I was doing the same thing.

Please keep doing what you are doing, the way you are doing it, and we can continue bat it around here in the forums, as we should.

 

[Blacknight]

In an attempt to deliver on pledges of a transparent government, Mr. Obama said he would change the way the federal government interprets the Freedom of Information Act. He said he was directing agencies that vet requests for information to err on the side of making information public -- not to look for reasons to legally withhold it -- an alteration to the traditional standard of evaluation.

Well, BrandonD, perhaps there's some previously-unavailable possibility lurking in this new transparency (as reported in today's Wall Street Journal).

 

[Schuyler]

Should this episode spell the end for the show? So please share your insights, I'm genuinely curious. Should I throw in the towel?

Heavens, no! My comments were directed more at the forum than the interview with Sprinkle. If I didn't make that clear, I apologize. We, on the forum itself, seem to be largely infatuated with the 'nice guy' part of Sprinkle. I enjoyed listening to him. It's just that he was extremely philosophical and without much substance. I found myself rolling my eyes a few times. I think we ought to 'show our skepticism' here a little more openly as we discuss the show. I kinda thought that was what we were expected to do: Point out contradictions and disparieties. But that's just my opinion, which I have simply added to the pile for consideration. I earnestly hope the Paracast lasts long into the future.

My comment about your comments is sincere. I had more insight from what you said than what Sprinkle said. I guess I've been thinking around the ideas for awhile, but I hadn't put it as succinctly or as well as you did, so it had the effect of grounding and coalescing my vague thoughts on the subject. I'm speaking of the apparent connection between this plane of existence and what appears to be, maybe, the next plane of existence where the ET-guys (a tech term) seem to be able to transition between the two or exist in both worlds. That's an intriguing idea. (I almost hate to say this, but Strieber uses this idea in his latest book, but his vision is extremely dark and I'm glad it is fiction, I hope.)

I'm not asking for you and Gene to be harder on this type of guest. The tough treatment should be reserved for the genuine pretentious charlatans who are out there telling lies and bilking the public to further their own ends. Sprinkle deserves to be heard from by virtue of his long standing in the field and his serious research, especially in the field of abductions. Indeed, there would be a gap if you did NOT interview him. It would be like refusing to interview Friedman. Unthinkable.

After all, he's a nice guy--just a bit credulous is all.

 

[Frozen E.T. Burrito]

behind that easy going nature there seems to me at least to be a man with a great sensitivity for what I guess one might call The Bigger Picture.

Totally agreed. Like the title of that book "Nothing in this book is true, but it's exactly the way things are" sorta.

Because I'm trying to be a bit less harsh with those that I don't suspect are engaging in out-and-out damaging fraud.

And you did an awesome job! I felt like yall got a little close to too harsh a time or two, but never really crossed that, and rebounded nicely, thanks to him rebounding nicely as well... yall were all three very skilled in conversation, and were all three carrying the conversation very, very far intellectually, and it's all improv, so it's super cool that yall are able to navigate so nicely together. I really feel as if you should have this fellow on again, and take him back to his childhood.

A lot of our beliefs toward "the paranormal" are formed in childhood, like, for instance even something as simple as what you felt when you very first heard of "Bigfoot", and maybe you used to look out your bedroom window for him and mentally prepare yourself for the possibility that he really could walk by at any moment, under the moonlight, through your neighbors yard... at least that's just an example from my own to go by... who knows what formed his trajectory towards that focus, that is no longer even so obvious even to himself, he has taken in so much information over the years it has all blurred together some, so folks have to be led to those wells of memory... he's sure to have some very awesome, seemingly mundane memories that helped form how he chose to focus his attention on "the paranormal" all of his life.

I think it would be an excellent idea, as some of us have been even mentioning in some other thread around here, the notion of actively trying to seek out all of these elders as possible...

While every other show focuses on "the big names" or "people who were at Roswell", yall should seek out and make a record of as many old timers and their views on "the paranormal" as possible.

 

[BrandonD]

People will be losing jobs at unprecedented rates, inflation will run rampant within 3 years, all while we build monumental deficits and battle terrorism on multiple fronts. The last words that will come out of a very smart President Obama's mouth for the foreseeable future will be "UFO" and "disclosure". In the best of times, "disclosure" never makes even a minor blip on the radar of public concern.

I'd put the whole "disclosure" discussion into suspended animation for some time to come. Windmill tilting takes courage but it shouldn't step over the line into self-immolation.Perhaps some day, but not any day soon!

No need to consider the situation so narrowly. It's not either "Obama giving televised disclosure" or "suspended animation".

How about simply placing the investigation of ufos somewhere on the government's priority list? It doesn't have to be anywhere near the top, it just has to be there.

One possibility might be to form a (small) governmental body that investigates ufos on an official basis.

This could be done and I don't think it would adversely affect any of those massive social problems you cited. There are well-funded governmental organizations that are devoted to things FAR less important.

I grabbed a quick example courtesy of google: The US Botanic Garden is a government-funded organization in charge of creating artistic displays of plants for the purpose of beautifying the Washington capitol complex. They received over $6 million dollars in 2005.

(link 15 government programs we dont need - Homeland Stupidity )

A small public government organization devoted to investigating ufos could be funded on far less than $6 million per year, I'd wager.

Even if this organization didn't immediately contribute to our knowledge of the subject, it would immediately perform the massive feat of legitimizing the subject of ufos among the educated class, in a big way.

I know very little about government and politics, this is just one suggestion that popped in my head to show that this subject does not need to be seen in such black and white terms.

 

[TMW]

I thought the Leo Sprinkle interview would be better than it was. He is clearly well read, but he needs to buy a computer and listen to the “peer review” that goes on during the average episode of the Paracast.

 

[AnnetteMarie]

First of all, I think we have to separate the fact that Mr. Sprinkle is a very nice man from the exploration of the things that he said. So yes, he is a nice, polite, charming man. But, I am not letting his politeness cloud my view of what he said -- that is what the Paracast is about isn't it? Testing people's statements, for one thing.

For those of you that say they did not think that he was married to the idea (whatever that means, it's his idea) that we came from Mars -- Here is a transcript of 59 seconds of the show starting at 47:45. I listened to it several times through headphones to make sure I got it right:

Leo - "I read German and French studies of people who would be taken underground and for several days without clocks, they would be monitored. And it turns out, according to these studies, that the people's diurnal cycle, or their daily rhythm, was 24 and a half hours, or 25 hours. Well, that struck me as strange. Why would that be? If we grew up on planet Earth, we humans would have a 24 hour cycle. Because that's what the claim is that we go around the sun, every 24 hours. Well then I asked one of my friends who is an astronomer, and I don't know if he's right, but he claims that the Martian cycle is 24 hours and 37 minutes. Yeee Haw! That says to me that we humans, or at least some of us, came through Mars. Because if we have a 24 and a half, or 25 hour a day cycle, then we didn't originate on planet Earth."

.... Or help me understand what I don't understand about this guest.

Starting at 48:43 + - into this episode:

"so that's very exciting to me to think that maybe some day we can find out whether this information is accurate and whether we did come through Mars"

that really does not sound like a dogmatic belief in the thought our circadian rhythm says some of us came through Mars. It rather sounds like someone who is intrigued by a thought, and would like it to be true, but is open to evidence proving either way.

 

[bobheck]

Starting at 48:43 + - into this episode:

"so that's very exciting to me to think that maybe some day we can find out whether this information is accurate and whether we did come through Mars"

that really does not sound like a dogmatic belief in the thought our circadian rhythm says some of us came through Mars. It rather sounds like someone who is intrigued by a thought, and would like it to be true, but is open to evidence proving either way.

So he contradicts himself in less than a minute. I rest my case.

 

[AnnetteMarie]

everybody contradicts themselves, often from one sentence or thought to the next. you cannot think without doing it, as if you always think the same way, you are more robotic than human.

as for the good doctor Sprinkle, I maintain my impression that what he had to say was completely different than your impression of his conversation with David and Gene.

My feeling is he is a person open to evidence either for or against his theories, and thoughts.

The fact that he was not trying to use his thoughts to sell us a bridge, but was only sharing them with us in conversation, meant a lot as to how I received what he had to say.

now, since both of us have pretty much had an equal chance to share our opinions with each other on the way we interpreted his statements/thoughts on Mars and our circadian rhythms, I propose we let this rest as it is.

 

[bobheck]

...I propose we let this rest as it is.

I totally agree. Thanks for the lively conversation.

 

[CapnG]

An enjoyable episode. Not great, sorta B, B+. Sprinkle is certainly a kindly gentleman with an inviting personality BUT he seems to lack discernment on ANY scale. The fact he lives offline in this day and age also means he's GROSSLEY OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE MAJORITY OF HUMANITY. Am I overstating that? I don't think so.

Face it, the internet has gone from a neat toy, to a consuming distraction, to an indespensible tool, to a vital part of our existence in a mere decade. CNN recently ran a poll that asked what people would rather give up for a month: sex or the internet? No points for guessing which won, the silence of the bed springs should tell you. The internet is THAT important and ol' Leo is shooting himself in both feet and his left arm by remaining offline.

As a consequence, easily researched and refuted concepts and cases are still considered valid by him. It's almost like he doesn't WANT to pass judgement (this is the "all ideas are valid" complaint David usually brings up). Whatever work he's done in the past, maintaining this level of "detachment" threatens to move him from the cautious/prudent catagory to woo-wooville.

 

[Blacknight]

No need to consider the situation so narrowly. It's not either "Obama giving televised disclosure" or "suspended animation".

How about simply placing the investigation of ufos somewhere on the government's priority list? It doesn't have to be anywhere near the top, it just has to be there....

I know very little about government and politics, this is just one suggestion that popped in my head to show that this subject does not need to be seen in such black and white terms.

Again, I'd disagree. This is clearly a black-and-white issue. Politics is all about perceptions and implications. ANY mention of UFOs or the paranormal, especially in an era of very serious and critical challenges (all of which will not even be close to being "fixed" over the next decade), would result in a firestorm of adverse reaction, regardless of the proposed funding levels. These matters simply are not even close to being a concern or priority for most Americans. Such a government effort, whether through funding or otherwise, would be seen as frivolous and a dangerous perversion of priorities.

Of course, the strength of our system is that anyone is free to spend his money on any endeavor he believes worthwhile. Witness NIDS. So, I see the disclosure effort as yet another distraction, a useless and impractical exercise doomed to fail. For people driven by an insatiable desire to find an "answer" I believe energies are better directed toward independent, privately funded research. Government will engage the issue only when it must; and there is no such compelling reason today.