• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Nancy Talbott, Robbert van den Broeke, April 29, 2012

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Ok, Robert may have some issues he has to deal with but hey, don't we all?! In Australia i am on what is called a Disability Support Pension due to psychological issues that make it hard for me to do things "normal" people take for granted... I have hallucinations, i dissacociate and lose time, i am afraid of the dark some nights and others i am not, i hear voices sometimes blah blah blah and i can sympathize with someone in that situation definitely... I do believe from what i have heard so far (i am halfway through the show now) that he believes in what he is saying...

It would be interesting to know if he was "in the spotlight" before he met Nancy or if she has encouraged him into "going public" ?

I have seen some weird things in my time but i wouldn't necessarily go mainstream with what i have experienced... But hey, we are all different ;)

Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk 2
 
wwkirk said:
There are really plenty of people who don't know how to use Photoshop. I'm one of them. I've never used or seen the program though I have used lesser image editing programs. Not everyone is up to the task of creating plausible fakes.
Click to expand...

Ah, but not using it or seeing it doesn't mean you don't know what it does in a round about way ;p

Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk 2
 
I have an hour or so left to the episode, which I will only be able to listen to tomorrow, but c'mon, this guy is a joke - Gene you did an admirable job of trying to reason with Talbot. However, I was disappointed in Chris for giving any of this garbage any merit. Robert is either crazy or full of it. If he's crazy, I feel sorry for him. If he isn't, well he just wants attention. Nancy Talbot is so far into it that she's decided that she may as well go for it even though it's clearly a crock. Yes yes, researcher out in the field and all that - who cares. You don't have to get off your ass to see there's B.S. written all over this.

I look forward to hearing the rest of the show.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
Chris didn't participate to the extent that we wanted. He was traveling, in a motor vehicle, and the connection was difficult to sustain.
Click to expand...

That's understandable. I was just disappointed that he give any credence at all to this. I understand that he is friends with Talbot, so maybe he's just being nice.
 
Angel of Ioren said:
That's understandable. I was just disappointed that he give any credence at all to this. I understand that he is friends with Talbot, so maybe he's just being nice.
Click to expand...

From what i can perceive from listening to Chris, i think he was playing "devil's advocate" to appease Nancy and calm her down when she would get fired up

Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk 2
 
Well, I know a lot of people in the field, but my circle of close friends is small. That gives me more space to offend people when I deem it appropriate. :)

But I don't get invited to their cocktail parties either, not that I'd go.
 
I wish Nancy would stop answering questions for Robbert and his friend Stan! Ian she their manager or something? She talks like a "handler" does for a celebrity or rock star!

Sent from my GT-P1000 using Tapatalk 2
 
Nensha is a definitely a genre of the paranormal that hasn't had much press of late so its been great to have this Robert dude turn up. Coincidently I have been listening to the archive and was up to the first time Nancy introduced us to this dude. The Serios photos as much as they were criticised had an interesting artifact about them, that being that the "photos" were of real places or immediate things that had a verification but had slight changes to them. It was their imperfection that made them more authentic as being thought formed. Of course there is the implication that they were made up anyway.

Unfortunately these photos look like they have been cut out and stuck on appendages, edward scissor hands style and then flicked in front of a camera. The UFO one even has the suspension line evident.

Lets say they are real. What are there implications? Even within the closed system of this experience it's really amazingly pointless, ridiculous and complicated. If it isn't enough just to create an image or a manipulate an existing image with your mind, to exactly copy an image existing in a unseen random book where an image is "cut out photoshop style" and then overlaid, well thats just even more complicated and pointless.

Maybe peoples reluctance in believe in these photos credulity is that to do so would be even more disappointing then the actual amateurish nature of these images. I mean they don't even look "artistic" they look crap. Maybe this could be a new genre of the paranormal, "Craptography".

Theres also the theory that a they are crap on purpose so to maintain the element of "free will", self spoiled like most paranormal phenomena. nah ,
its just made up.
 
As it is my opinion that the questioning was laid out in an articulate and intelligent manner as not to allow the guests to run off, presenting this man and his bizarre accounts in the light it truly deserves. Ms. Talbott serving as counsel, (as an attempt to protect her investment), was undoubtedly agitated by Mr. Steinberg's queries, injecting answers to questions in which Robbert Ven Den Broeke was quite able to answer on his own. After listening to the show carefully one would have many additional questions in regard to the validity of R.V.D.B.'s stories. R.V.D.B.'s companion, Stan, (the village propeller head, and conjurer), adds to the bizarre mystery by his own form of potential self incrimination. There are many statements one could point out deflating R.V.D.B.'s accounts. This should not necessarily speak to the totality of Ms. Talbott's crop circle research, however I would suggest there are numerous red flags. Just a few impressions taken from the interview.

  1. Attempted escape from a mental institution, on more than one occasion.
  2. R.V.D.B.'s precognitive ability to discern images on photographic equipment, ( ie: digital cameras), when held in his possession, unless it is Gene Steinberg's iPhone camera.
  3. And this one, (my favorite as of late), The Contamination Phenomenon. @ 46 minutes and 30 seconds of hour two R.V.D.B. describes how he does not believe reading about UFO's or paranormal phenomena from books or magazines, due to the fact that other people would contaminate his knowledge that he feels, learned from the spirit world. Sound familiar ?, well it most certainly should. Just a few weeks ago we learned about S.R.I., (AKA), Spirit Rescue Intl. , and Irene Allen-Block, the organizations founder. In her vitae she clearly states: “ she refuses to learn from books or from people, as it would contaminate her knowledge learned from the spirit world...., when she was very small.” And yes, we found out what she was all about! I would suggest that Robbert has been a very busy bee indeed!
 
Gene asked near the end of this episode how Nancy Talbott could get "mainstream scientists" interested in Robbert's story. I can respond as one of those "mainstream scientists" that there's little chance any professional will want to follow through on the claims of Robbert and his posse. As has been emphasized numerous times in this thread, the photos from Robbert are silly hoaxes that could have been produced in a number of ways, the simplest being to surreptitiously wave a cut-out picture in front of the camera. The testimonies from "hundreds of Robbert's clients" (in Talbott's words) mean nothing. (By the way, "clients"? Surely much money flows through Robbert's con here.) Talbott's own testimony is so credulous as to beggar belief. She would credit Houdini himself with supernatural powers. Her explanations in the BLT online "report" of the obviously fraudulent images are the very definition of special pleading. Why would any scientist bother with this hot mess?

I've followed Nancy Talbott's work for a long time. I've been fascinated by the pseudoscientific language she uses to describe observations of UFOs, crop circles and now Robbert's miracles. It all is crafted to convince the listener that she follows standard protocol, but that is far from the case. Her wonder at finding "99.99% Pure Hydromagnesite" in a Dutch crop circle shows her naivete. How does this very earthly substance clearly dumped on the grass take a crop circle from human-produced to paranormal? Who knows -- but it sounds like science. Her fascination with Robbert shows that she lacks true critical capacities on these topics. For that matter, continually touting the expertise of William Roll, the late parapsychologist, as a scientific source is ineffective as well. Roll was fooled many times. For example, look at his role (sorry!) in the Tina Resch case ("The Columbus Poltergeist") in 1984. Few people are easier to fool than parapsychologists.

Did anyone notice besides Gene that Robbert's "computer guru" is a "former mentalist"? Shouldn't that ring some alarm bells? Maybe loud enough to wake even Chris from his slumber here?
 
Thanks for jumping in. I moved your message to this thread to be more relevant.

Yes, the presence of Stan the computer guru/former mentalist does invoke possibilities. I hope others picked up on this, and I can tell you Chris is aware of the implications. But the connection problems prevented him from participating as much as he might have wanted to.
 
Paleontologist said:
I've followed Nancy Talbott's work for a long time. I've been fascinated by the pseudoscientific language she uses to describe observations of UFOs, crop circles and now Robbert's miracles. It all is crafted to convince the listener that she follows standard protocol, but that is far from the case. Her wonder at finding "99.99% Pure Hydromagnesite" in a Dutch crop circle shows her naivete. How does this very earthly substance clearly dumped on the grass take a crop circle from human-produced to paranormal? Who knows -- but it sounds like science. Her fascination with Robbert shows that she lacks true critical capacities on these topics. For that matter, continually touting the expertise of William Roll, the late parapsychologist, as a scientific source is ineffective as well. Roll was fooled many times. For example, look at his role (sorry!) in the Tina Resch case ("The Columbus Poltergeist") in 1984. Few people are easier to fool than parapsychologists.
Click to expand...

thanks for stating that as those are the things that struck me from reading her BLT site - it's just confabulation masquerading as science. this really is the type of material that steers us in the wrong direction. while i know it is very difficult for the Paracast to constantly set up great guests, i do feel that wasting two episodes to get slightly closer to the truth of all this invention might have taken one, maybe even two episodes too long to get there.

it's really a challenge to keep up with all of the fakery and hoaxing that is in the field, but i'm very appreciative when we call it out on the table. i remain completely unimpressed by crop circles, and would like to know a little more about crop nests.

i think that there is also a lot to be said about finding guests who have real stable science behind them, or at least enough respect in varying fields, that their legitimate discussion and insights can nudge the paranormal ball a little further towards interpreting reality and further away from someone's fantasy and mythology.
 
It's important to cover the questionable claims too. But sometimes it takes a little time to get everything on the table. Other shows just present such material without critical comment.
 
Back
Top