March 22nd / interview with Mike C!

[Gen]

Brandon makes a great checklist above. I would add two other questions, if we were to make the list open-source:

a) Is this person always The Great Big Hero of every story they tell?
b) Does this person talk so fast that you can't tell when they're stopping to take a breath?

Neither A nor B proves anything on its own. They just seem to be fairly reliable indicators of people who are not to be trusted.

MikeC is, obviously, neither A nor B, nor does he match anything on Brandon's list. So I'm not sure why people here are raking him over the coals.

Being able to make fine motor movements during REM sleep -- such as grabbing, as opposed to just turning over -- can be evidence of a sleep disturbance or health problems. It is, in other words, not the norm. Two people doing this, in sync, during a deep sleep and then waking at the same time strikes me as even more unusual.

It was Fla-Vor-Aid they used at Jonestown. This distinction was one of the clues in a detective novel I read, so it's stuck in my mind forevermore.

 

[David Biedny]

Brandon & Gen,

You both make me very proud to have you as forum members. I think you've both make some excellent and highly relevant observations regarding some useful criteria for critical evaluation of just about anyone making claims about anything. Good work!

dB

 

[quasar]

The 3 most important questions for "experiencers" in my opinion:

1) Does the person claim to have "the answers"?

2) Does the person display any of the psychological characteristics of someone who tells stories or seeks public attention?

3) Does the person have something to sell?

These 3 questions are equally important (or more important in my opinion) as the content of the story itself.

i think number 2 hits the nail on the head. although i have not (and will not) check out mike c's blog, this leads into the 3rd question. could there be a financial motivation involved?

if someone does claim to have the answers and that person will impart the the answers only after the transfer of money .... personally, i consider them con men and charlatans.

i don't believe that mike c's motivation is financial gain, it's more along the lines of seeking a forum for public attention.

 

[David Biedny]

I think that Mike C. is speaking out about this stuff for many of the same reasons that motivate me - and Mike can step in and correct me if I'm wrong - we need to talk about it, straight and simple. Now, there are folks that might say that by the virtue of me doing this show with Gene, I'm simply seeking attention, and they could easily make that case without any stretch. It's true that I like when folks listen to what I have to say, who doesn't? And I like talking, that's pretty obvious, though I hope I can actually contribute to the bigger picture and conversation, instead of just vomiting words with no meaning or purpose. In my life, I've certainly been a public figure, especially in the realm of graphics software, but I'm genuinely into the stuff, as well as music creation tools and multimedia technology, and would play with the stuff whether anyone was interested in my experiences and opinions about said technology. OK, I'm rambling and will stop now. :shy:

dB

 

[mikec]

I made the decision to come forward with my eyes open.

And, as David said above, the act of speaking out is something that I was compelled to do. There was a deep feeling, an important need to speak out.

I cannot explain that deep feeling.

Before I came forward, I thought long and hard about it, and everything it would involve. Taking this bold step meant that I would have to be totally honest with my memories and experiences. I made a promise to myself, and to the world. And, I truly feel I have kept to that promise.

There is a lot of stuff I simply cannot explain. And, if there is a simple explanation for something, I make sure to try to articulate that possibility further. My blog is awash in me trying to ask those questions of myself.

I am content to try to clarify anything, as long as people ask me in a way that I can deal with. Reading some of these posting has been so strange, some of the comments (truly) do not seem to match the person I am, or the experiences I talked about.

My experiences are fleeting and vague. But, I feel strongly that SOMETHING is happening, what that may be - I am totally mystified.


Mike Clelland

 

[Gareth]

Mikec this question might be inappropriate, Im not sure. But Im curious if this is the first time you have been 'challenged' by anyone regarding your experiences? If so how does it make you feel?

Do you find yourself doubting yourself now? (even more than you were of course)

To be completely honest (this is the truth), I was a little worries for ya initially. After hearing you speak about depression it seemed obvious that you were never really too far away from 'that place', and I thought all this negativity might send you spiralling back into the pit.

You seem to be doin' ok though, so thats good to see.

 

[mike]

I'd like to add something about this whole discussion that's going on regarding Mike C's credibility (this one turned out long, so be warned):

For those of us who've reached the basic conclusion that paranormal phenomena cannot all be dismissed as delusions and hoaxes, this means that *something* is definitely going on that is beyond our current understanding.

So if something is going on that is beyond our current understanding, this means that we cannot dismiss testimony for the reason that we don't understand how it is possible.

Yes, in our current picture of the world one cannot hear someone say something in a lecture, and then later watch a video of the lecture and the words are missing. According to our picture of the world, that could only be explained as a "delusion".

But in our current picture of the world beings do not pass through solid walls and speak to us with telepathy. Objects do not take off from a standstill to an instantaneous incredible speed. And yet people are witnessing these things again and again and again.

What I am saying is: In this field, almost EVERYTHING is strange and difficult to believe. But nevertheless something is happening and it won't go away. We need to stop carelessly discarding testimony because we don't understand it. We are all essentially talking monkeys and we shouldn't think so highly of our mental models of the world.

These paranormal phenomena (and my personal experience) tell me that there is something incorrect at the fundamental basis of our assumptions about ourselves and the world. So we shouldn't take what we imagine to "know" for granted.

Now with all that said, I still think the veracity of testimony is definitely something worth trying to find. But since it's very difficult to judge the story on the content alone, information about the teller of the story is essential.

The 3 most important questions for "experiencers" in my opinion:

1) Does the person claim to have "the answers"?

2) Does the person display any of the psychological characteristics of someone who tells stories or seeks public attention?

3) Does the person have something to sell?

These 3 questions are equally important (or more important in my opinion) as the content of the story itself.

If the person checks out for all 3, then there's still that darned "delusion" excuse, which is basically another one of those "terms that essentially mean nothing", all of which help to keep our talking-monkey world intact.

So then there's question 4:

4) Does this person come off as an intelligent and critical thinker?

If a person checks out for 4 as well, then you can be sure that if this person has decided to come forward with his story, then he has probably already considered all the tidy mundane explanations for his experience, and yet he STILL thinks there is something more to it.

I don't necessarily consider myself a great judge of character, but in my opinion Mike C passed my checklist, so I'd say his testimony is worth listening to.

Just throwin out stuff to consider.

well reading Mr Ritzmans post at paratopia based on and relating to actual personal experiance with subject, id say points 1 and 2 are established as affirmatives in this case

 

[mikec]

Gareth,

How have I been doing with all the conflicting opinions on the (and other) forums?

At first, it was just disappointing. It really was, my heart sort of sank.

But, some of the harsh stuff simply did not seem to ring true. I feel like I know myself pretty well, and the speculation about my intentions just don't match who I am. And once I recognized that, it wasn't so bad.

It's interesting, if you look at the feedback after my first interview in November - the postings were quite supportive.

Gareth asked:
Do you find yourself doubting yourself now? (even more than you were of course)

Hah! I always doubt myself, and it varies depending on the day. But, I feel strongly that SOMETHING has happened, but I want to be very cautious how I define what that might be.

No, I'm not spiraling back into the pit. I was well aware of what I was doing when I came forward.

What I did get from some of the feedback was I need to be a little more cautious how I present myself.

Yes - I did some name dropping, true enough.

I have some experiences that are so fleeting and so weird, that I'll choose not to share them. The Delores Cannon story seems to fit with that. A lot has been made of that story, and the way it's being re-hashed is that if I made THAT up - I made it ALL up.

To me, it seems like a funny playful story, and believe me, I searched the DVD out for a reason - at some level I just NEEDED to get to the bottom of that memory. When I found out, the first thing I did was cal Leo Sprinkle and we both had a really giddy belly laugh. And that's how the story seems to me - it's funny.

 

[Gareth]

well reading Mr Ritzmans post at paratopia based on and relating to actual personal experiance with subject, id say points 1 and 2 are established as affirmatives in this case

You cant be serious?

1) Does the person claim to have "the answers"?

You say he DOES claim to have answers? We must have been listening to different interviews.

 

[Gen]

To be completely honest (this is the truth), I was a little worries for ya initially. After hearing you speak about depression it seemed obvious that you were never really too far away from 'that place', and I thought all this negativity might send you spiralling back into the pit.

Depression -- particularly severe depression -- is the worst thing I've ever experienced. I have an aunt who's suffered from both depression and cancer, and she says she'd choose the cancer any day.

One upside to it, if there is an upside, is that whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Once you've been through depression it makes you enormously tough. It usually forces some wisdom down your throat as well.

 

[mike]

You cant be serious?

1) Does the person claim to have "the answers"?

You say he DOES claim to have answers? We must have been listening to different interviews.

edit- Yeah I would like to know what thats about too. (the message for the world thing. Strange) <!-- google_ad_section_end -->

these are the answers i refer to the "important" ones for "the world.........."

what could be more "serious" than that ?

 

[fencejumper]

Hello

Regarding some of the criticism Mike C is receiving, I think a lot of the points against him are baseless because they invalidate anyone sharing strange experiences. For example if a person witnesses a strange event and decides to share the story, then this is attention seeking but with good intentions. That isn't proof the person's motivation is publicity. Its fair to question motivations, but unless there's evidence this not useful discussion.

Also, I could be mistaken but I thought Mike C had a career without all this stuff. It's the same with David and Gene. I always find it interesting that they are respected in their profession yet they subject themselves to ridicule in this field. I work at a large university where there are many egos. I guarantee you that NO professor in my department would put up with the shenanigans that go on here. I think it says a lot about people willing to put their reputations on the line... could you say they are down-to-earth?

How about some constructive discussion? I found the highlights of this episode to be Mike C's discussion of patterns. Particularly the ones regarding people who've had experiences and now feel compelled to discuss them, the polarized UFO experiences in the Dr Leo Sprinkle session, and the synchronicity. I don't consider them concrete proof but they are interesting to speculate what they could mean. Mike C, I am wondering how these experiences have changed you? If none of them had happened, where do you think you would be today compared to the person you are now? Maybe it's better to be baffled and troubled than happy and ignorant...

PS - Thanks for sharing. I think one of the best joys in life is seeing in a new perspective.

 

[mikec]

Hello Fence Jumper,

You asked:
"I am wondering how these experiences have changed you? If none of them had happened, where do you think you would be today compared to the person you are now?"

In a way, I can answer that pretty well. I didn't truly start exploring my own experiences until about 3 years ago. So, I have a sort of base line starting point.

Since looking into this, my life has been crummy. I wallow in self doubt. I have been tense and anxious. This "path" has been really difficult. So, the short answer - It has impacted me negatively.

That said, the toothpaste is out of the tube, and I don't think it'll ever go back in. I feel like I need to try and figure this out.

At one point in the show, David spoke that this was a conversation, and that was true. I got on a roll, and shared some stories that were not earth-shattering, but - in my opinion - sort of odd.

I felt totally comfortable sharing some stories that didn't really have much of a point, I simply found them curious. I'm fascinated by the synchronicites. And - somehow that made for some heavy-handed forum postings.

And yes, I have a career beyond these curious memories. I worry speaking out will impact my free-lance work.

Mike C

 

[mike]

critisism is the Result of critical thinking

i live in a differnt global location to most, my point of view has been shaped by the local factors, and its that six degrees of seperation that i contrubite. its not much ive said that before, it just is was it is.

this show is a great show, its theme is seperating "signal from noise" its "reputation" is one of intellectual honesty and the afore mentioned critical thinking.

but that doesnt mean i can be lazy, and rely on the hosts to do the legwork for me, and just swallow the neat pill presented.
i'm here because im a critical thinker, and this case has some aspects that some ppl myself included dont feel right about.

Mike has told someone in an email that his telling his story is important, he says its important for him, and ..........for the world.

the Paracast has presented this guest, one would assume thru the signal/noise filter for which the show is themed, and this question (and others) have arisen

but its this question thats most relevant

blossom goodchild expressed similar language
so have the one armed banditos

what ? what aspect of the last case presented is of "importance" to "the world"

the answer may be just another case of "delusions of grandeur" or if he really is in "contact" this "thing" might indeed be of global importance

of course the question remains un answered


so a critical thinker has the two options above to consider

on the really "does have something as a result of contact, of world importance to relate" - we have only the assertion from mike this is so

on the delusions of granduer option we again only have mikes own words

Sorry is this seems like a weird ego thing (and it is), but I wanna let folks know that I was interviewed for 2 hours on the PARACAST with Gene and Dave. It's mostly Dave sounding insightful and smart, and me mumbling.

dont get lazy and let David do your critical thinking for you. hes only human, he makes mistakes like we all do

listen to the march22nd interview again

because you never know you may find out the secret.

that "thing" that mike has said is important to the world

and then can you please post or PM the answer to me

because as a critical thinker i really want that answer

i may not find out until the documentary comes out, i wonder how much a copy will cost

 

[mikec]

That email that I sent to Jeff has been taken a little too seriously.

I looked thru my emails and I still have it. It was a follow up on an interview than never aired with Jeff Ritzman when he did a podcast called The Second Eclipse.

Here's what I said:

The interview with you was a big thing for me, part of my "coming out" and that process seems really important to me. And, to the world... doing my small part to elevate the world consciousness (a lofty proclamation, but sorta true)


That's it.


I stand by that. I think the act of coming out, stepping forward, and talking about my experiences honestly - is - in fact "doing my small part to elevate the world consciousness"

And as I re-read the email, it sounded like me, that's how I would say something to a friend. When I reuse a plastic bag I'll say: "I'm doing my small part to save the world." Again - a lofty proclamation, but sorta true.

 

[David Biedny]

Mike,

It certainly looks like Jeff quoted you... but didn't include the complete quote in context, which is a little dicey, IMO. I totally understand what you're trying to put across, I'd like to think we're doing the same thing over here at The Paracast. Changing the world, one person at a time.

dB

 

[jritzmann]

Here's what I said:

The interview with you was a big thing for me, part of my "coming out" and that process seems really important to me. And, to the world... doing my small part to elevate the world consciousness (a lofty proclamation, but sorta true)


That's it.

This is blatantly untrue. This quote leaves out an entire line, and tries to connect the statement to the "lofty" sentence 3 lines down.

"And, to the world." is the end of the statement. Then it skips a line and starts a new paragraph. "Doing my small..." is not how that paragraph starts. You know how it starts, and you KNOW those two statements are not connected.

You are very clearly trying to downplay the statement. That's not being forthright, and it's an alluding that I'm trying to make something out of nothing.

I can post the full email if you like, but I think you should correct it. If it's how you felt it's how you felt. Stand by it or don't. But what you've quoted yourself saying is not what was phrased.

David-"dicey"? Really? How would you like me to forward this to you? Then you tell me what's "dicey".

 

[David Biedny]

This is blatantly untrue. This quote leaves out an entire line, and tries to connect the statement to the "lofty" sentence 3 lines down.

"And, to the world." is the end of the statement. Then it skips a line and starts a new paragraph. "Doing my small..." is not how that paragraph starts. You know how it starts, and you KNOW those two statements are not connected.

You are very clearly trying to downplay the statement. That's not being forthright, and it's an alluding that I'm trying to make something out of nothing.

I can post the full email if you like, but I think you should correct it. If it's how you felt it's how you felt. Stand by it or don't. But what you've quoted yourself saying is not what was phrased.

David-"dicey"? Really? How would you like me to forward this to you? Then you tell me what's "dicey".

Actually, as long as Mike agrees, I think you should post the entire email, so we have the full context. I don't want anyone to be misquoted here.

dB

 

[David Biedny]

Jeff,

If you're going to come on here with a total attitude, I would suggest thinking before you type. I just posted that you should indeed post the entire email, so WE can be the judges, OK?

dB

 

[jritzmann]

Jeff,

If you're going to come on here with a total attitude

I think I was pretty direct, and impersonal. No attitude here. Mike has the email...so he can post it. You now have what I was sent. So, it's up to you to call it out.