May 8, 2016 — Erica Lukes with Greg Bishop

[Gene Steinberg]

Erica Lukes has worked with MUFON, researching experiencers, and is now focused on our own research, with the Utah UFO Research Project, into orange fireballs.

There was also a special appearance by Greg Bishop as guest co-host.

Some of this discussion, with Greg and Chris O'Brien, continues in After The Paracast, an exclusive feature of The Paracast Plus. Check Introducing The Paracast+ | The Paracast — The Gold Standard of Paranormal Radio for more information about our premium package.

 

[wwkirk]

From the interview Erica is a positive force in ufology. She also appears to be on good terms with MUFON.
Greg had some of the most interesting stingers.

 

[Ravensfee]

Enjoyable episode.

Erica seems to be involved in a number of subjects each of which could have been a sole topic of a Paracast episode. Greg makes a great stand-in co host.

And thanks for asking my tardily submitted questions!

 

[Erica Lukes]

I had a great time on the show, Gene and Greg asked good questions. Next time I might actually sing.... OK, maybe not Thanks for listening!

 

[Mr. Fibuli]

Hey great shows.
Great question by Spectre73 too.

I started listening to ATP and I have to say if Gene stops talking about Super Girl etc I am not going to be a happy camper.

PS how do we get involved with transcription of episodes-just go ahead and submit it? I am capable of proper syntax, punctuation, etc. I just prefer to post in a lazy incomprehensible way.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Very little discussions about comic books.

As to transcribing episodes, just go ahead and submit via a private conversation with me. Prefer you start with roundtables. For those who submit them, I'll work out a subscription extension or something to compensate you for the worthy efforts.

 

[Randall]

I completely agree with spirit of Erika's point of view on sharing information. When I first approached MUFON to gain access to sighting reports, after some weeks of attempting to get an answer, I was told that I couldn't have access to case files without paying membership fees plus additional fees per case on top of that, which at the time would have added up to hundreds of dollars for just a handful of reports. Being of the opinion that the truth about UFOs is of great significance to all people on Earth, and consequently that UFO case files should be freely available to anyone who is interested, MUFON's fees put me off right away.

Then I ran into commentary on MUFON's internal politics that also turned me off to that organization. Since then, a number of sites have popped up with a lot of free info, so I figured, why bother with MUFON when I can network with others for free without the negative politics? So I empathize with Erika on stepping back from MUFON, and I really appreciate her comment that we should have "one community", which was why I started USI. Greg's comments were also very apropos on that issue. Great attitudes!

I also appreciate Greg asking my question about the American Airlines 434 case, and appreciate Erika's response. It's too bad there isn't more to go on for this case. My resources are limited, but I'll make a couple inquiries. Who knows? Maybe we'll get lucky. At the present time I'm working on the assumption that what is being described sounds more like something happening on the ground, but if there is more specific info I'm not aware of that definitively indicates that the orange square was airborne, then I'd like to know more about that. At this point it doesn't seem that the radar returns and the visual on the orange square can be assumed to be the same object.

 

[pong]

Gene Steinberg doesn't understand why people dislike Hillary Clinton? Oh my, I think we've spent a little too much time watching CNN.

When Ambassador Stevens was dragged off and brave Americans were fighting for their lives in Benghazi, the ordeal unfolded over many hours. U.S. military assets around the Mediterranean were aware of the crisis and were poised to respond and mount a rescue operation. Regional commanders were waiting for the green light from Secretary Clinton and/or the President. The green light never came. Obama and Clinton just shrugged their shoulders and went to bed.

Active duty and retired military don't dislike Clinton. We despise her.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

You've fallen for the Fox News BS about Benghazi. You imagine a Secretary of State to be a military commander. I'm not inclined to go down rabbit holes. Let's stay on topic please.

 

[Spectre73]

Just finished listening - enjoyed the show. It was an easy enjoyable listen. Erica came across very well.

Thanks for putting my question to Erica

 

[chuck shick]

Erica Lukes has worked with MUFON, researching experiencers, and is now focused on our own research, with the Utah UFO Research Project, into orange fireballs.

There was also a special appearance by Greg Bishop as guest co-host.

Some of this discussion, with Greg and Chris O'Brien, continues in After The Paracast, an exclusive feature of The Paracast Plus. Check Introducing The Paracast+ | The Paracast — The Gold Standard of Paranormal Radio for more information about our premium package.

Gene you just can't help yourself can you? Starting off the show by taking a shot at Trump. Then you seriously state " I have no problem with Hillary and I can't understand why anyone else would?" I'm sick of but used to your liberal bias but if you can't understand why some people have a problem with Hillary then you are insane.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I understand the difference between hating someone because of false information presented by one's opposition and what they actually do. This is not about "liberal bias" but about proven facts. Clearly you have fallen for lots and lots of BS from the tone of your attack.

I'm sick and tired of people who can't think for themselves.

Trump? It's hard to know what he stands for, since he changes by the moment.

One more thing: Further political diatribes will be removed from this thread. If you want to open a new thread on the subject, fine, but it will be monitored carefully for personal attacks.

 

[Sue]

I haven't listened to the whole show yet but a couple ideas struck me as I listened to the talk about the various databases of UFO info out there.

One way to get engagement and buy in from non-UFO-expert academics who have funding to research questions of interest to them would be to open various UFO data sets sets to academics as sources for conducting research they ARE interested in. For example, a historical sociologist of religion might be happy to access a very detailed level of data on UFO spirituality. I get the impression that for people into UFOs, the data collected are all about proving UFOs are real and, once that's done, what they are/where they come from (standard ETH). To garner more interest in the data archives, some marketing that drops that epistemological imperative would be necessary. A bit of an intellectual shift for UFO researchers to be able to prevent convincingly, but no reason it couldn't happen.

Part of the effort would have to involve transparency about data collection, coding, storage and redaction procedures. People who want to do non-UFO research with UFO research generated data sets will still be held accountable for the integrity of the data they use by their peers. They would have to address how the questionable validity and reliability of such data may affect their research. Personally I think it's possible to argue these points reasonably, but having been an academic I also understand why no one from academe wants to spend time sifting out the wheat from the chaff. If the UFO and paranormal research communities want to involve academe and science, they need to drop their own agendas long enough to market a relevant product to those communities. Data might be that product. (Unfortunately, the FREE project does not count in this regard. The methodology is so bad that the less said about it the better.)

 

[Derek Wood]

I'm sorry but this episode was very uncomfortable and she was full of contradictions and lacked understanding on several key issues. Most of her replies were very thin and repetitive in nature. Erica was pushed by Gene several times on explaining her dubious association with people whose credentials are highly questionable and she completely brushed away these important points that were made (her reasoning and responses were embarrassing to listen to in my view). Arguing that 'traditional' academia moves 'too slowly' was a lamentable remark given MUFONs lack of a synthesised/peer-review system in place for its work coupled with the organisations insular approach. On key issues such as integration of disparate data she displayed no strategic thinking on this issue. I could go on.