Jim Sparks

[Tom Levine]

Wow, So I take a business trip to San Francisco for the day, come back, and I miss the whole Jim Sparks Forum Bashing Party! Darned it all to HECK!

Well, it was a good interview. You guys only have 2 hours, and this isn't an interrogation. You read the book. You found several logical inconsistencies, and you called Sparks out on it. You allowed him the chance to answer your questions, you gave him 1 1/2 hours to do his thing, and then you spent the last portion of the show analyzing Sparks testimony, and rendered some conclusions based solely on the merits of the interview. Your conclusion was that you don't buy it, but you want him back for a second interview. You were cordial, respectful, and you know what...Hopefully, he'll come back.

The best part of the show, by the way, was the last 30 minutes of you guys assessing Jim Sparks. Pat answers or not, I've heard Sparks before. There was nothing really that new there. What was interesting, was to listen to your intelligent, logical discussion about Sparks in a polite, and frank way.

I loved it.

That said, I still think that Sparks needs to be investigated by an independent researcher. TheParacast might have asked him some hard questions, but NOT ALL THE HARD QUESTIONS, for sure. So he's writing yet another book now? When will this rollercoaster ride end? How much damage must the paranormal field endure, before Jim Sparks finally graduates to the Royce Myers Hall of Shame? I've said it before, I'll say it again: The paranormal field never seems to get a break.

Back to Gene and David. One final point: I do agree that before we get into discussing the military possibility, we have to first get past whether or not Jim Sparks is telling the truth. I absolutely agree that he is, like many contactees, a very cordial, pleasant personality. But, is he telling the truth? If he is telling the truth, then we should listen to him. If he is not telling the truth, then he is a fraud, and he needs to be exposed.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Wow, So I take a business trip to San Francisco for the day, come back, and I miss the whole Jim Sparks Forum Bashing Party! Darned it all to HECK!

Well, it was a good interview. You guys only have 2 hours, and this isn't an interrogation. You read the book. You found several logical inconsistencies, and you called Sparks out on it. You allowed him the chance to answer your questions, you gave him 1 1/2 hours to do his thing, and then you spent the last portion of the show analyzing Sparks testimony, and rendered some conclusions based solely on the merits of the interview. Your conclusion was that you don't buy it, but you want him back for a second interview. You were cordial, respectful, and you know what...Hopefully, he'll come back.

The best part of the show, by the way, was the last 30 minutes of you guys assessing Jim Sparks. Pat answers or not, I've heard Sparks before. There was nothing really that new there. What was interesting, was to listen to your intelligent, logical discussion about Sparks in a polite, and frank way.

I loved it.

That said, I still think that Sparks needs to be investigated by an independent researcher. TheParacast might have asked him some hard questions, but NOT ALL THE HARD QUESTIONS, for sure. So he's writing yet another book now? When will this rollercoaster ride end? How much damage must the paranormal field endure, before Jim Sparks finally graduates to the Royce Myers Hall of Shame? I've said it before, I'll say it again: The paranormal field never seems to get a break.

Back to Gene and David. One final point: I do agree that before we get into discussing the military possibility, we have to first get past whether or not Jim Sparks is telling the truth. I absolutely agree that he is, like many contactees, a very cordial, pleasant personality. But, is he telling the truth? If he is telling the truth, then we should listen to him. If he is not telling the truth, then he is a fraud, and he needs to be exposed.

If he is telling the truth, he needs to actually get some physical evidence to back it. Or at least give good explanation as to why he's failed or not interested in it. He'd sell more books and have his message taken more seriously. If legit. Hell, even if not maybe.

Btw. Anyone know for sure if the Howe case happened AFTER his lung goo event? If so, even more silly he would mention that on the show in regards to the question of why he didn't get the physical evidence.

It would be interesting to see what he thinks of the "Roswell Crash". If he thinks it was a alien crash, why didn't the wreckage disappear?

Most of the seeming legit abductees at least try to get physical evidence. Or video. More than just dust btw.

 

[Tom Levine]

If he is telling the truth, he needs to actually get some physical evidence to back it. Or at least give good explanation as to why he's failed or not interested in it. He'd sell more books and have his message taken more seriously. If legit. Hell, even if not maybe.

Btw. Anyone know for sure if the Howe case happened AFTER his lung goo event? If so, even more silly he would mention that on the show in regards to the question of why he didn't get the physical evidence.

It would be interesting to see what he thinks of the "Roswell Crash". If he thinks it was a alien crash, why didn't the wreckage disappear?

Most of the seeming legit abductees at least try to get physical evidence. Or video. More than just dust btw.

Say, A.Leclair: Wasn't Sparks answer to the Goo/Physical Evidence question, much like a Vegas commercial?

"Whatever happens in Zeta...Stays in Zeta..."

How unfortunate for the rest of us, I suppose, right?

Also, by the "Howe" case, I'm assuming you're bringing up the Sparks reference to Linda Moulton Howe and her apparent reporting on Roswell evidence analysis?

Gee, that's odd on two MORE points (they keep coming...):

Point 1: Why is Sparks using someone elses research, regarding physical evidence to the Roswell case no less, to back up his own case? He's saying that even if he does provide physical evidence, no one would buy it? So, that's reason not to provide physical evidence? Any psychologists out there that can analyze this? Why would Sparks go OUTSIDE his own personal experiences, using other known figures in the field, to bolster his own personal claim, that physical evidence cannot be produced from Zeta? Well, that's another strike against the search for logical consistencies isn't it...

Point 2: Um, Sparks is bringing up PHYSICAL EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO THE ROSWELL CASE? OMG! Well that's a foot in the mouth if ever I did hear one. Yes, exactly Mr. Sparks. Let's bring up Roswell, for a second. Believe what you want, be it the ET expalanation, the balloon explanation, the flying dummy-drop expanation, etc...Roswell is CHOCK FULL OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE!!! Roswell is CHOCK FULL OF CORROBORATING TESTIMONY FROM MULTIPLE PARTIES!!! Roswell is CHOCK FULL OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE...Summary: Roswell case is full of evidence. Why on earth would Sparks bring up cases involving REAL evidence, when he can't, himself, produce any, because the Greys won't allow sand to slip through his fingers as he travels through walls, through dimensions, through time?

That was a bone-head reference on his point. Oops. He'll need to explain himself out of that one, on the next interview...We'll probably see a whole chapter in his next book, dedicated to the subject.

 

[idris33]

I'm so glad I found this show. I listen to, and read, quite a bit of subject matter on the paranormal and one thing that bothers, and scares, me is that too many people are just willing to accept a story without any level of critical analysis. I thought that Gene and David did a great job of allowing Jim to tell his story and asking questions to clarify some of his points. Afterwards, I thought that they were very responsible in analyzing the information that Jim shared and came to very logical conclusions.

It really frustrates (and sometimes scares) me is that, with so many people claiming personal encounters, no solid evidence is ever shown/shared (that I know of). This is very much like many religions operate in that so many people are accepting of many claims without any evidence whatsoever and/or critically challenging it. I don't wonder so much about the people making any of these claims, their information should be taken on it's own merit. I wonder about the people who are easily sold on anyone's claims without analysis. I'm glad that Gene and David are out there using their gray matter and asking the questions that need to be asked.

Keep up the good work!

 

[Rob]

Just one anomaly on the physical evidence thing, Mr Sparks stated that early on in his experiences he had honeysuckle flowers on his lawn outside and also on his carpet inside his house, therefore to him proving that he wasn't dreaming and that he really had been taken outside and brought back in. How come that would be allowed but not anything else? And the sand thing on his mother's feet... ?

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Say, A.Leclair: Wasn't Sparks answer to the Goo/Physical Evidence question, much like a Vegas commercial?

"Whatever happens in Zeta...Stays in Zeta..."

How unfortunate for the rest of us, I suppose, right?

Also, by the "Howe" case, I'm assuming you're bringing up the Sparks reference to Linda Moulton Howe and her apparent reporting on Roswell evidence analysis?

Gee, that's odd on two MORE points (they keep coming...):

Point 1: Why is Sparks using someone elses research, regarding physical evidence to the Roswell case no less, to back up his own case? He's saying that even if he does provide physical evidence, no one would buy it? So, that's reason not to provide physical evidence? Any psychologists out there that can analyze this? Why would Sparks go OUTSIDE his own personal experiences, using other known figures in the field, to bolster his own personal claim, that physical evidence cannot be produced from Zeta? Well, that's another strike against the search for logical consistencies isn't it...

Point 2: Um, Sparks is bringing up PHYSICAL EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO THE ROSWELL CASE? OMG! Well that's a foot in the mouth if ever I did hear one. Yes, exactly Mr. Sparks. Let's bring up Roswell, for a second. Believe what you want, be it the ET expalanation, the balloon explanation, the flying dummy-drop expanation, etc...Roswell is CHOCK FULL OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE!!! Roswell is CHOCK FULL OF CORROBORATING TESTIMONY FROM MULTIPLE PARTIES!!! Roswell is CHOCK FULL OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE...Summary: Roswell case is full of evidence. Why on earth would Sparks bring up cases involving REAL evidence, when he can't, himself, produce any, because the Greys won't allow sand to slip through his fingers as he travels through walls, through dimensions, through time?

That was a bone-head reference on his point. Oops. He'll need to explain himself out of that one, on the next interview...We'll probably see a whole chapter in his next book, dedicated to the subject.

Dunno, I turn commercials

No, he referenced some South American abduction case (if I remember correctly, and one that's a proven hoax I think, but not 100 percent sure it's the same one) and that is what I was referring to. I don't recall him mentioning Roswell ever. That's why I wanted him to be asked what he thinks about it.

He is correct if he thinks that not all people would buy his evidence. However, some would. Many would if it's isotopic ratios proved ET in origin. Here's what it wouldn't do, weaken his case. He only has something to gain by providing actual evidence. Now if he's a hoaxer, then that's a different story. So, the only reasonable reason he would have to not TRY to get physical evidence is due to he being a hoaxer. Oh, that's right... it will disappear. Fine, video record it doing so...... Not hard. Take some of that money he makes from his book sells and buy a freakin cam corder off ebay. Get some physical evidence, and record it disappearing.

 

[Tom Levine]

...Take some of that money he makes from his book sells and buy a freakin cam corder off ebay...

Yup! This man absolutely needs to be debunked. Royce, are you listening? Go call your friends!!!

 

[Tom Levine]

I'm so glad I found this show.

Welcome to the thread. Good post too.

 

[Tom Levine]

Just one anomaly on the physical evidence thing, Mr Sparks stated that early on in his experiences he had honeysuckle flowers on his lawn outside and also on his carpet inside his house, therefore to him proving that he wasn't dreaming and that he really had been taken outside and brought back in. How come that would be allowed but not anything else? And the sand thing on his mother's feet... ?

Yes, Gene and David touched upon this in their interview, as I recall, and came to the logical conclusion that this was one of his many illogical acts. I would have grabbed a camera, personally. Furthermore, since he experienced physical evidence in this experience, which took place during the first 6 years of his alleged abductions...Why wouldn't he have experienced OTHER physical evidence during the last 20 plus years? Perhaps Al Gore put it best..."An Inconvenient Truth".

 

[miner]

"..
An abductee/contactee for 20 years of conscious memory SHOULD have all the answers. Though I agree with the rest that with extraordinary claims we need evidence.
He doesn't have it..

"

To me, he would have been more credible by simply saying he didn't have a answer rather than deflect the questions he did. I almost sensed he felt compelled to answer everything put to him. Now I understand it doesn't prove whether he is truthful or not. It just arouses my suspicions.

The fact that he has no proof doesn't necessarily make me more inclined to believe him one way or the other. To my knowledge, the majority who claim to have these experiences have been unable to present any useful evidence to back their story. Why? No one can explain.

Most abductees (many, many with over 20 years of these experiences) can't answer, recall and explain everything posed to them regarding their experiences. Assuming he is the real deal, he would be the exception. Especially since I believe he claims to remember his experiences without regressive hypnotherapy to recall his experiences. It is unique to have the details he claims without being regressed. And I realize the problems and criticisms associated with regressive hypnotherapy. Not endorsing it as the end all be all. It's very shaky.

It will be interesting to watch this play out and see if he comes back on.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Many repeated abduction cases, and even some non repeated abduction cases have some form of physical evidence. Here is a list of some categories. Before reading keep in mind, I said evidence, not proof.

Marks on their body, radiation burns, phantom pregnancies, strange liquids found on clothing, ground trace cases, "implants", measurable illnesses such as PTS, and other stress related illnesses (which argues against hoax, although not misinterpreting), strange anomalous activity involving electrical appliances acting strange when the abductee is near. Neighbor hood black outs, radar ufos to corroborate, photos of ufos, or black helicopters, video, soil samples gathered at locations (not trace cases, stuck in the abductee's fingernails etc.), animal deaths and/or mutilations, foot prints, Then there are alleged pieces of craft.

There are some abductees out there with absence of physical evidence that I am open to. They usually have multiple witnesses and/or taking polygraph tests, remain anon and not cash in on their story etc. Jeff Ritzman slips by with some of that. Plus he's a proven skeptic which has some weight with me. Also, Jeff at least claims to have tried to get something recorded, and not acted like Jim who seems to not care.

Jim claims to have an encounter friend, it would be interesting to see if he's fudging on that.

 

[Tom Levine]

The fact that he has no proof doesn't necessarily make me more inclined to believe him one way or the other. To my knowledge, the majority who claim to have these experiences have been unable to present any useful evidence to back their story. Why? No one can explain.

Welp, I'm extremely embarrassed to say that I've listened to oh, what...13 or 14 hours of Jim Sparks interviews so far. YIKES! He gets an A for entertainment, and an F for fraudulent (possibly).

He HAS presented alleged proof, is the problem with his testimony. He's claimed to have a bottle of goo extracted from his smokers lungs, as a "gift" from the aliens. He's claimed to have connected with another abductee in Florida, a videographer if I remember correctly, who remembers a group abduction, but where is this guy, and what's his story? He's stated on C2C that he'd be willing to take a POLYGRAPH, or a series of them, so come on, let's get that process started! That's evidence too.

In other words, Sparks has made claims, during certain interviews, that he can, in fact, produce evidence in varying forms, such as corroborative testimony, physical evidence, polygraphs, and hey, since he's so gung-ho about helping us get to the truth, let's set up some video cameras and do a "real world" investigation.

Miner, it's not the lack of proof that I find so disturbing about Sparks...It's claims that such proof could be extracted from his experiences in a variety of ways, and yet, none of that proof has mainfested so far. That's a big problem with me.

... It will be interesting to watch this play out and see if he comes back on.

Oh, he'll DEFINITELY be back...Media is media, and this guy is writing another book.

 

[Tom Levine]

Many repeated abduction cases, and even some non repeated abduction cases have some form of physical evidence. Here is a list of some categories. Before reading keep in mind, I said evidence, not proof.

Marks on their body, radiation burns, phantom pregnancies, strange liquids found on clothing, ground trace cases, "implants", measurable illnesses such as PTS, and other stress related illnesses (which argues against hoax, although not misinterpreting), strange anomalous activity involving electrical appliances acting strange when the abductee is near. Neighbor hood black outs, radar ufos to corroborate, photos of ufos, or black helicopters, video, soil samples gathered at locations (not trace cases, stuck in the abductee's fingernails etc.), animal deaths and/or mutilations, foot prints, Then there are alleged pieces of craft.

There are some abductees out there with absence of physical evidence that I am open to. They usually have multiple witnesses and/or taking polygraph tests, remain anon and not cash in on their story etc. Jeff Ritzman slips by with some of that. Plus he's a proven skeptic which has some weight with me. Also, Jeff at least claims to have tried to get something recorded, and not acted like Jim who seems to not care.

Jim claims to have an encounter friend, it would be interesting to see if he's fudging on that.

This is an excellent post.

I think it goes to the idea, that reasonable people are not closed off to the idea that this phenomenon is real. But, nothing should be taken at face-value. All the potential evidence that Mr. LeClair mentions in his post, is rock, solid information that we can sink our teeth into. Does it justify a conclusion that the ET answer is the right answer? Absolutely not. But, evidence can suggest it as ONE of the possibilities.

The problem is, let's assume we have REAL abduction cases, REAL people with REAL events that are unexplained. On behalf of those people, I think it's fair to make the following statement:

People committing fraud in this area, are creating victims.

If there are real abductees out there, then hoaxters and book promoters, who are lying about their experiences in an effort to profit off of the yet to be explained pain and suffering of others, are doing harm to those people. Fraudulent abductees are taking a potentially real and disconcerting phenomenon, and turning it into a discredited circus.

That's why evidence is so important. That's why abductees need to be proven to be the real thing. That's why, if Sparks is committing fraud, he needs to be shut down. He is creating victims.

Great list of possible evidence, LeClair. Very thought provoking.

 

[The Hawk]

These 4 votes "I think he fell for government trickery." is nuts.

An abductee as articulate as him with 20 years of mostly conscious experiences..
So? Someone here thinks that black opt scientists or whoever have experimented on him THAT long?
Has given him visions from afar with psychotronics?
Or somehow implanted a whole list of vivid experiences that appears to have lasted over a long time?

Here we are questioning alien motives as if we know **** about how they think.. Well this would require a group of humans..
WHY would any humans do that for 20 years?
Secondly you must believe the shadow government has extreme, extreme technology to be able to pull it all off.

I just find that all a hundred times harder to believe than him having real experiences with E.Ts or having faked it. If his experiences were a lot more messy and unclear like Streiber or Jeff Ritzman then that idea wouldn't be so hard for me to swollow. I know that remote psychotronics have been experimented with by the military.

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Unfortunately, by outing frauds, it also hurts the field too. The more frauds the more ridicule etc. I would like to see more accountability in paranormal programs and book and dvd publishers. It seems they want $$ over anything else for the most part. This allows in the frauds more.


As for brain washing. I don't see any reason to conclude that with Sparks of yet. I'm glad it was mentioned as another scenario just for the sake of attempting to cover all ground. But beyond that, there's more evidence to indicate fraud to me than anything else. If not fraud, sloppy thinking/fuzzy logic and I guess just coincidental cop out remarks. I'm all for more exploring of his case however.

 

[CapnG]

WHY would any humans do that for 20 years?

Why wouldn't they?

Two things I never underestimate about humanity:

1) The ability to create huge, impractical looking stuff and make it somehow work.

2) The ability to develop new and creative ways to mess with their fellow humans.

 

[cottonzway]

I thought the show with Jim was excellent. I was happy to hear the tough questions asked. What I got from hearing this interview and doing a little research on Jim is that he is at least an honest guy with the right intentions. I don’t think he is a charlatan. Now in terms of his claims I think there is a very good chance he has been “messed” with as a program of disinformation. That is my guess at least but I also take into consideration that this topic is a difficult one to begin to understand and that at times logic will not make sense. His story sounds of a government program on him but I think the fact that he seems genuine gives him credibility to trying to explain this as best as he can. I don’t know how a lot of humans work in terms of their though processes so I can’t begin to question if some alien race does things that are odd to me.

One thing that I will add is my thoughts on taking this approach to kind of “rip” the guest during the same show. While I agree that this story has more questions then answers I think spending a fair amount of time saying how you don’t believe the guy during the same show will make these guests not want to return. Don’t get me wrong, it makes great radio and it isn’t that I disagree so much with what was said, but in the same sense I think this is a way to not get the guest to return. I know I would not return if I had an interview on the Paracast and this happened to me. To those who are on the receiving end of this it could seem like a “hit piece” on them even if it is not the intention. I’m not at all saying kiss someone’s ass or be a cheering squad for them, but if both of you guys have these concerns it is probably best to not talk about them until the guest has returned. Just my opinion though.

 

[miner]

Oh, he'll DEFINITELY be back...Media is media, and this guy is writing another book

Tom, I hope your right. I hope he does another paracast. Even though he commented how insightful the questions were, he seemed that he may have felt a little roughed up by some of David's questions.

Let's see how sincere he is about helping us get to the truth.

 

[cottonzway]

Oh, he'll DEFINITELY be back...Media is media, and this guy is writing another book

Tom, I hope your right. I hope he does another paracast. Even though he commented how insightful the questions were, he seemed that he may have felt a little roughed up by some of David's questions.

Let's see how sincere he is about helping us get to the truth.

Do I know you? I assume you are talking to me by first name (my name is Tom) and I posted last so I assume you are talking to me. I don't have my first name posted in my profile (not that i care really) but it would seem you know who I am.

Never mind, I see the guy above's name is Tom. LOL

 

[The Hawk]

New book completely aside, my character judgment tells me that Jim Sparks would come back if asked. I have no doubt.

I wonder if he's felt the monetary joy for his first book. Most books of this type don't sell squat. His story does not look even 10% motivated by desire for monetary profit IMO. He wrote it 9 years ago.. Took it to ?one publisher, got turned down... Let it sit there and did nothing with it for 8 years lol. Some people pushed him to get it published and there you have it..