June 20th episode - Stan Friedman & Kathleen Marden

[Kieran]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

How can you or plant life tell the difference?



I thought ice core samples dating back over many thousands of years show CO2 levels move up and down after the temperature has, therefore making it appear to be a result rather than a cause. There are other things that indicate the same but ...what does it matter anyway? Besides I was responding to your "We as a species are alive today because this planet is an Oxygen planet." statement. We're alive because of the presence of both Oxygen and CO2.

There is undeniable evidence that the planet has a natural cycle of ice ages and Interglacial periods. From what I understand it has more to do with the sun than anything else. We're a fly fart in a hurricane compared to mother nature my man. I guess ones opinion of this sort of thing is based on many different things and I wouldn't try to claim to be an expert.

Train your throwing out stuff that i am already aware of. Yes Carbon Dioxide has been part of the Earth atmosphere since the very start probably. It's a natural chemical substance. AND yes it is a valid substance to life on the Earth. We inhale Oxygen which is required to keep or metabolism working properly, and we exhale Carbon dioxide. Plant life does the opposite it needs Carbon dioxide to function, and it gives of Oxygen. All this points you made are Correct. But you are not really getting it!!

Carbon Dioxide is still a Greenhouse gas. And the Greenhouse effect is a well established principle that has been accepted and peer-reviewed by authorities who know lot more than you or me here when it comes to this area of expertise. A greenhouse gas like Carbon dioxide absorb heat radiated from the sun, and it is then sent back down to the planet. Carbon dioxide traps heat= Otherwise this planet would be a lot colder in summer months for everyone.

So when you have extra CO2 in the atmosphere more heat is being trapped. This is were Global warming reality, makes plenty of sense.

Huge Forests that in the past that soaked up all the normal C02 levels in the past now have to deal with extra Human CO2 now in the atmosphere. So what is the problem with that? Man activities have caused many of the forests that once about are today cut down!!! So the balance that was once there is now completely wrong. We have extra CO2 in the atmosphere and less plant life and forestation to produce Oxygen for life on the planet.

 

[davide]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

While the ETH is a valid hypothesis, no, I'm not convinced that it's more likely than not, which is what the "balance of probabilities" means, that aliens are coming here from "there." Some of those cases you cite are indeed interesting (I don't think much of O'Hare, or Socorro, and definitely not of Braxton County), but as they stand they are still a long way from providing evidence of alien visitation, even on the BoP standard of proof.
Paul

I just found it surprising that someone who spends so much time and energy in the field of UFOs would think that the likelihood is that we are "not" being visited by another intelligence. Not to put words in your mouth (or pixels/em units on your fingers), maybe your interest merely lies in the "possibility", and nobody can be critical of that. I guess that's somewhat of a departure from Seth Shostak.

But I can't believe that all of the more credible sightings such as the unfortunately-named "Phoenix Lights", RAF Bentwaters (despite government "meddling") and JAL 1628 are due to swamp-gas, weather anomalies, lighthouses or black projects.

Note to Gene: The Phoenix Lights tops my list of interesting sightings. No doubt, you may have contacts that could make a good show. A lot of stories such as the 3 craft that allegedly "pancaked" together and disappeared in a flash needs further discussion. I think the multiple witnesses were at that rest area south of Cordes Lakes. But if it would mean putting Kitei on the radio, I'll pass -- her interpretation of the event is very annoying and, IMO, she doesn't have a voice for radio.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

I just found it surprising that someone who spends so much time and energy in the field of UFOs would think that the likelihood is that we are "not" being visited by another intelligence. Not to put words in your mouth (or pixels/em units on your fingers), maybe your interest merely lies in the "possibility", and nobody can be critical of that. I guess that's somewhat of a departure from Seth Shostak.

But I can't believe that all of the more credible sightings such as the unfortunately-named "Phoenix Lights", RAF Bentwaters (despite government "meddling") and JAL 1628 are due to swamp-gas, weather anomalies, lighthouses or black projects.

Note to Gene: The Phoenix Lights tops my list of interesting sightings. No doubt, you may have contacts that could make a good show. A lot of stories such as the 3 craft that allegedly "pancaked" together and disappeared in a flash needs further discussion. I think the multiple witnesses were at that rest area south of Cordes Lakes. But if it would mean putting Kitei on the radio, I'll pass -- her interpretation of the event is very annoying and, IMO, she doesn't have a voice for radio.

I think that it's important that there's a skeptical voice on the Paracast. Looking for the holes in claims is important to get to the truth.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

I think that it's important that there's a skeptical voice on the Paracast. Looking for the holes in claims is important to get to the truth.

We had Kitei on the show — once. That was enough.

And we also had another episode devoted to that subject early in our lifetime:

<a href="https://www.theparacast.com/podcast/october-14-2007-dennis-balthaser-and-mike-fortson/" >October 14, 2007 — Dennis Balthaser and Mike Fortson</a>

 

[Paul Kimball]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

Paul, you have the burden of proof.

That burden has been met, over and over. It's an accepted scientific consensus. You're the one who is arguing against that consensus, so the burden of proof has shifted to you. Debating 101.

All I asked for was 10 peer-reviewed articles. Is that so hard?

I guess it is.

---------- Post added at 07:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:01 PM ----------

"That's why the left and the right are butting heads so much on this [climate change]"

davide, I agree with you that the "controversy" is ultimately political, although you misstate the motives of the people who drummed it up, which include enabling a small number of neo-aristocrats to accumulate riches far out of proportion to their actual contribution while impoverishing everyone else. Thanks for the support anyway.

Man-made climate change is not controversial. The controversy lies in what we should do about it. Unfortunately, the industrial / corporatist opponents of doing anything have a habit of conflating the two, and even more unfortunately, some uninformed people have bought into the lie.

 

[davide]

Although climate isn't exactly the same as weather, I wanted to caution especially Paul and pixelsmith to avoid getting carried away and crossing the line in their posts. No doubt that Paul is very aware of a federal law (18 U.S.C. § 2074) making it illegal to issue a fake weather forecast.

And while my independent environmental-conservative-libertarianish political views often tend to be at odds with Gene's, he's well-intentioned and I do appreciate his time and effort at producing the show. So, I'd like to warn him to avoid wearing his suspenders when visiting Nogales.

If Paul takes Gene up on the offer to visit Arizona and they do the Tombstone tour, hopefully they avoid smiling or at least make sure that no more than one missing tooth is visible when doing so. The area around Globe is really neat for those into history and the outdoors. If you guys head over there, please don't play cards in the street with Native Americans -- you'll be very sorry if they catch you. And whatever you do, control yourselves and don't bother the cottontails or bullfrogs.

http://www.dumblaws.com/laws/united-states/arizona

 

[Michael Allen]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

I think of Friedman's work as "Flying Saucer 101" -- it was interesting to hear his take on other science topics.

---------- Post added at 08:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:07 PM ----------

Stan never bothers to mention that the very Dr. Simon he lauded didn't believe that the Hill's "experience" was a real one, instead his opinion was that the event was a fantasy created by Betty. Wicked misleading.

Lance, that's a rather disingenuous position--I think Stan is quite aware (i.e. probably knows that we know concerning Dr Simon's position...etc) of this and has (correct me anyone) probably highlighted this fact directly in other shows to prove a point.

 

[pixelsmith]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

That burden has been met, over and over. It's an accepted scientific consensus. You're the one who is arguing against that consensus, so the burden of proof has shifted to you. Debating 101.

All I asked for was 10 peer-reviewed articles. Is that so hard?

I guess it is.

---------- Post added at 07:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:01 PM ----------



Man-made climate change is not controversial. The controversy lies in what we should do about it. Unfortunately, the industrial / corporatist opponents of doing anything have a habit of conflating the two, and even more unfortunately, some uninformed people have bought into the lie.

Paul you have the burden of proof.
CACC is pure bullshit.

 

[Paul Kimball]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

Paul you have the burden of proof.
CACC is pure bullshit.

That's it. You repeatedly fail to offer anything constructive. You're just here to hammer home the same point, ad nauseum. That's called trolling. What makes it worse is that you've also taken to posting clearly false statements attributed to others out of context, and then won't step up and apologize for it when called on it, which leads me to believe that you knew it was false when you posted it, but you went ahead and did it anyway.

Consider yourself banned for three months. Note that this is not because you disagree with me (plenty of people do that around here), but because you can't conduct yourself in a civil and responsible manner.

 

[dyingsun]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

Pixel,
I really like you, but what the fuck happened to you these past few months ? Did you just get more 'vocal', or did something 'trigger' your conspiracy theory senses ? I love my conspiracy theories as well (some at least), but there isn't one behind everything, I hope.

edit: Will wait for your reply.

 

[Paul Kimball]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

While I think Pixelsmith is an idiot, I do humbly request that you not ban him or anyone from the forums. I think these things have a way of working themselves out without administrative effort. The former co-host petulantly banned people for petty reasons and summarily closed threads in a most unfair manner (always giving himself the last word). It was not pretty.

Lance

No sale, Lance. I didn't ban him because he was an idiot. I banned him because I believe he was knowingly posting false information, and because he was - in my opinion - clearly trolling. He was also consistently abusive in his posts to other forum members.

So he's gone for three months. Anyone who finds that too harsh, or think that I have somehow descended to Biedny's level, is free to join him.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

And I think Paul is being restrained here. It takes a lot to tick him off, and I fully support the decision.

 

[Kieran]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

Pixel,
I really like you, but what the fuck happened to you these past few months ? Did you just get more 'vocal', or did something 'trigger' your conspiracy theory senses ? I love my conspiracy theories as well (some at least), but there isn't one behind everything, I hope.

edit: Will wait for your reply.

Pixel is Caustic and his Insults while only Words do show the nature of his character. I've nothing against Pixel, really, seriously how could you have a serious problem with a person, that you have never met in person? I prefer it, if he was not banned!!! because believe or not. He is reflective of a cultural mindset that is present on the Web today. Free speech should be respected as long as the other person respects your right to speak. Personally. My only problem with Pixel, is not the insults that i have read, directed at me, and other forum members, it is his unwillingness to engage in a constructive conversation.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

Pixel is Caustic and his Insults while only Words do show the nature of his character. I've nothing against Pixel, really, seriously how could you have a serious problem with a person, that you have never met in person? I prefer it, if he was not banned!!! because believe or not. He is reflective of a cultural mindset that is present on the Web today. Free speech should be respected as long as the other person respects your right to speak. Personally. My only problem with Pixel, is not the insults that i have read, directed at me, and other forum members, it is his unwillingness to engage in a constructive conversation.

The insults instead of facts posture is what got him banned. At least if you're going to be caustic, deliver some meaningful content.

By the way, Kieran, your formatting was funky and I had to fix it. It's best to just use our Reply windows for your messages. If you paste from a word processor, particularly Word which is a horror show, it can cause havoc.

 

[Kieran]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

The insults instead of facts posture is what got him banned. At least if you're going to be caustic, deliver some meaningful content.

By the way, Kieran, your formatting was funky and I had to fix it. It's best to just use our Reply windows for your messages. If you paste from a word processor, particularly Word which is a horror show, it can cause havoc.

I was using a different browser from the normal one i use, and the writing setting was different. I don't use a Word processor to post Gene.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

I was using a different browser from the normal one i use, and the writing setting was different. I don't use a Word processor to post Gene.

Oh. OK. It's just a general suggestion for everyone else, though, to just use the standard text formatting from our forums. It makes it less painful for everyone. Not all browsers support the same features, and custom fonts may create display havoc.

 

[Paul Kimball]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

He is reflective of a cultural mindset that is present on the Web today.

Yes, sadly, he is.

Free speech should be respected as long as the other person respects your right to speak.

Free speech is never absolute, and that is particularly true when it comes to a privately owned and operated message forum where people have the luxury of posting under pseudonyms. In such a forum, respect for other members needs to be paramount, as does the respect for the facts (see his egregious post about Stephen Schneider, for example).

He's gone for three months. When that period is up, should he want to come back, his membership will be automatically reinstated. If he has learned to play more reasonably with others, then he'll be welcome here. If not, then he will find himself banned permanently.

 

[Ron Collins]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

So... back to Stan and the book....

I have always liked listening to Stan. He does say the same things a bunch but mostly they are still relevant things to say. Personally, I don't mind hearing about Roswell stuff every now and again. I know I am in the minority but I doubt all avenues have been exhausted there. As a brief for instance, we could look at the movements, memoirs, family and firend recollections. and other corporate, Scholarly, and government documentation for the countries top scientists, administrators. and engineers during this period. We could look at the money the military spent on things and see if there are comparative anomalies. Basically, the sexy work has been done. Now its time for the meticulous detailed investigation to begin. Each time the Roswell stuff is talked about it has the potential of spawning further and perhaps inventively fresh investigative channels.

As for the different origin topics, I have to agree that the ETH is, in my opinion, has the greater probability of being representative of "some" of the craft. The one thing that I like about Stan is that he is quick to acknowledge that other theories may have merit, but he is only interested in the craft that are of ET origin. Their is no pretense there. Its just what he is into. I respect that.

I enjoyed the parts about Bigelow. I think I am bi-polar when it comes to that guy. Some stuff I hear pisses me of others I think that if I had a billion dollars I would be doing the same thing. If he is truly as invested in MUFON as I have heard then it is a double edged sword. On the one hand, the warehouse of data that MUFON has collected over the years will finally be truly analyzed and careful scrutiny applied along with other correlative data. On the other hand, NDA's ensure we will never know the outcome of that research. But, I can't honestly say that if I were him I would do it differently. The major exception is that I would mostly likely make the findings and the detailed information used in their formulation, open to the public at some point/ I don't think Bigelow cares about that or sees any relevance in doing so. I could be wrong, that is just my impression.

 

[cottonzway]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

Weak and lame to ban Pixel IMO. You are doing exactly what DB did to him, Paul. After your rant on David (which largely I agreed on even though I did like David on this show in general, but your points were valid), I would have figured you better then to follow the same exact pattern on the same poster. Not agreeing does not translate to trolling. To ban a member here that has been here for years for those reasons is weak. It was weak when Biedney did it and it is weak now. How hard is it to ignore someone here? It is a button click away from not having to read the posts of posters you do not wish to read or engage with. If you can do that because you have to be able to view all posters as a site admin then simply ask him not to reply to you anymore. If he does not respect your wishes, then act accordingly. I am quite disappointed in the site setting this precedent.

 

[Paul Kimball]

June 20th: A plea to Gene and Paul

Weak and lame to ban Pixel IMO. You are doing exactly what DB did to him, Paul. After your rant on David (which largely I agreed on even though I did like David on this show in general, but your points were valid), I would have figured you better then to follow the same exact pattern on the same poster. Not agreeing does not translate to trolling. To ban a member here that has been here for years for those reasons is weak. It was weak when Biedney did it and it is weak now. How hard is it to ignore someone here? It is a button click away from not having to read the posts of posters you do not wish to read or engage with. If you can do that because you have to be able to view all posters as a site admin then simply ask him not to reply to you anymore. If he does not respect your wishes, then act accordingly. I am quite disappointed in the site setting this precedent.

You missed the point. I didn't ban him because he disagreed with me. Indeed, a lot of you disagree with me, and I haven't banned you. I banned him because he was a troll, with all that the term implies, and because he posted patently false and wholly out-of-context information and then refused to address it when it was brought to his attention - instead, he just ignored it and continued with his rants. That's not how you promote constructive debate.

He's gone. Everyone needs to get over it.