New shows

[Brian Haughton]

How about 'the Amusing Randi'?

 

[meciar]

/bump

[rant] These forums sort of suck... they shouldn't because there is good stuff here. But it does. Sorry. I use about 5 other forums which have replies 10min after you post. I wouldn't mind some sort of feedback from my suggestion from anyone... but no. The Paracast can't be doing that well if it can't get more than 3 active members or so on their forums (I don't care how unpopular forums are - I'm 23 and I use forums a LOT and so do most people I know..). [/end rant]

 

[Gene Steinberg]

/bump

[rant] These forums sort of suck... they shouldn't because there is good stuff here. But it does. Sorry. I use about 5 other forums which have replies 10min after you post. I wouldn't mind some sort of feedback from my suggestion from anyone... but no. The Paracast can't be doing that well if it can't get more than 3 active members or so on their forums (I don't care how unpopular forums are - I'm 23 and I use forums a LOT and so do most people I know..). [/end rant]

Actually we have quite a few listeners, but, alas, only a small number of people in general ever use online forums, and it takes time to build these things; other forums have undergone development for years. I wish it were overnight, but it's not.

 

[Jim S.]

I'd like to see someone from more "mainstream" science talk about what they think of the paranormal - a skeptics view. I think it would be interesting to hear the other side of the arguments. Why do mainstream scientists generally want to disprove or ignore paranormal subjects?

Take a look at this article http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_1_25/ai_68966513. It's a few years old but comes from the National Science Foundation via Skeptical Inquirer. According to it "pseudoscientific beliefs can have a detrimental effect on the wellbeing of society."

Here's one more quote from the same paper:

Concerns have been raised, especially in the science community, about widespread belief in paranormal phenomena. Scientists (and others) have observed that people who believe in the existence of paranormal phenomena may have trouble distinguishing fantasy from reality. Their beliefs may indicate an absence of critical thinking skills necessary not only for informed decisionmaking in the voting booth and in other civic venues (for example, jury duty [2]), but also for making wise choices needed for day-to-day living.

I guess anybody interested in the paranormal are fools in "their" eyes. Ahhhh! It all hurts my fragile little mind...

 

[david_r_p]

/bump

[rant] These forums sort of suck... they shouldn't because there is good stuff here. But it does. Sorry. I use about 5 other forums which have replies 10min after you post. I wouldn't mind some sort of feedback from my suggestion from anyone... but no. The Paracast can't be doing that well if it can't get more than 3 active members or so on their forums (I don't care how unpopular forums are - I'm 23 and I use forums a LOT and so do most people I know..). [/end rant]

The good thing about the Paracast Forums, as opposed to others that are similar in content, is at least so far there isn't this hardcore "locals only" attitude that permeates the postings. If you post a question here it tends to get answered by someone, quite possibly even David or Gene. If you post something provocative it starts a dialogue. The other boards I've seen have a kind of herd mentality where the 10 to 20 obsessive posters (Coastriders has people in the 20,000 to 30,000 pst range [ridiculous, get a life]) operate on the same mindset and jump on you hard if you differ. (Try posting something negative about Art Bell on the Fantastic Forums and see what happens.) Or alternately, you have a board like Coastriders where the posting is so off-topic, so filled with "hello, good bye, I like your new avatar", that it is essentially useless as a board and really a quasi-chatroom.

I too would like to see expanded dialogue on this forum, as I think the Paracast is the top show of its kind and want it to succeed. Don't give up on the forum... Try to help and spread the word. I've brought people over to the show, but i haven't convinced anyone to sign up and post (yet).

 

[David Biedny]

david r p,

Thanks for the kind words. I would agree that the forums don't get at much action as we'd like, this is perhaps due to the fact that Gene & I do The Paracast as a labor of love, not a profit vehicle. The kind of revenues generated by C2C mean that they can pay people to literally go out and participate in online forums, and also allows them to have some marketing muscle in promoting discussion and audience participation. It's really difficult to get both quantity and quality of discourse happening on a shoestring budget. I mean, has anyone ever read the posts on Yahoo.com news items? Sheesh, it's terrifying to see the average writing style and level of discourse over there.

In my dreams, I'd love for these forums to have as much traffic as ATS, but hey, this kind of growth takes time and hard work. We appreciate that some of you wish Gene & myself could post every day, or even every hour, but the harsh realities of life make that a bit unrealistic. Perhaps one day The Paracast will have significant audience size and some real advertisiting income in order to grow the whole situation, but I suspect that if that happened, many of you would take us to task for selling out. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I'll try to make more time to post here, and to keep some dialog flowing. Meciar, hang in there! You've been a good fan of the show, and we don't want to lose you.

 

[Brian Haughton]

Take a look at this article http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_1_25/ai_68966513. It's a few years old but comes from the National Science Foundation via Skeptical Inquirer. According to it "pseudoscientific beliefs can have a detrimental effect on the wellbeing of society."

Here's one more quote from the same paper:
I guess anybody interested in the paranormal are fools in "their" eyes. Ahhhh! It all hurts my fragile little mind...

And of course Randi is a trained scientist and that's what makes him an expert on paranormal phenomena and qualified to make these generalized statements - Oh no wait . . . he's a trained stage magician . . .

 

[david_r_p]

david r p,

Thanks for the kind words.

Well earned David

 

[meciar]

thanks for all the replies guys. I appologize for my rather rude post before. I was just having a bad day and I know I shouldn't take it out on message boards, that's just lame. I do understand forums take time to gain members. Keep up the great work! I can't wait for the next show

 

[david_r_p]

thanks for all the replies guys. I appologize for my rather rude post before. I was just having a bad day and I know I shouldn't take it out on message boards, that's just lame. I do understand forums take time to gain members. Keep up the great work! I can't wait for the next show

We all have bad days...

 

[Raccoon]

Take a look at this article http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_1_25/ai_68966513. It's a few years old but comes from the National Science Foundation via Skeptical Inquirer. According to it "pseudoscientific beliefs can have a detrimental effect on the wellbeing of society."

Here's one more quote from the same paper:
I guess anybody interested in the paranormal are fools in "their" eyes. Ahhhh! It all hurts my fragile little mind...

You mean to say that all I need to say to get out of jury duty is say "I listen to the Paracast!" ? Why didn't anyone tell me sooner?

On the comment about getting the "skeptics" on to put forward their view, I'm in two minds. My first reaction was great, but now I'm inclined to agree with a comment made by a scientist on a show I once saw that covered crop circles (an idea for a future show?) where the guy said a criticism he received on his show about crop circles was he didn't offer a "balanced view" by allowing the skeptic camp air time on his show.

His reply was to the effect of "I'm struggling to get widespread acceptance of a phenomena that people have been predisposed to dismiss off hand. Why would I intentinally give air time on my show to people who won't consider the facts but already have the answers?"

Wish I could remmber the guy (or the show's ) name. I think he'd make a good guest.

Some starting points:
Crop circle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And in the course of lookign up things came across this:
http://www.lovely.clara.net/discovery2.html
:

 

[mjw]

Raccoon,
This may be a little old but I thought it was one of the best crop circle documentaries out there - www.cropcirclesthemovie.com

 

[Raccoon]

Thanks.... I'll look into it.

 

[Brian Haughton]

Couple of more ideas for guests - Jim Marrs - his interests cover a lot of territory (UFOs, JFK, conspiracies). Also Nick Redfern - a British UFO guy (based in US). He's author of 'On the Trail of the Saucer Spies: Ufos And Government Surveillance', 'Body Snatchers in the Desert: The Horrible Truth at the Heart of the Roswell Story' . . .

 

[david_r_p]

Couple of more ideas for guests - Jim Marrs - his interests cover a lot of territory (UFOs, JFK, conspiracies). Also Nick Redfern - a British UFO guy (based in US). He's author of 'On the Trail of the Saucer Spies: Ufos And Government Surveillance', 'Body Snatchers in the Desert: The Horrible Truth at the Heart of the Roswell Story' . . .

I think the show would be better served by guests that aren't so "overplayed" on other shows. Jim Marrs practically lives on Dreamland and his 9/11 truth crap is sooooooooo boring; however, Nick Redfern doesn't seem to suffer the same over-saturation and his books are extremely thorough (although sometimes tedious). The problem with so many of these guests is that once you've heard their schtick once, you've heard it a hundred times because they seem to replay the same narrative again and again. The only difference with the Paracast is that Gene & David ask more critical questions; don't appear to be internet fanboys; and don't seemingly let the guest completely filibuster the show (however, Dr. Greer's appearance this week was a notable exception as he did fillibuster).

By the way, I noticed you left Nick Redfern's best book off the list: Three Men Seeking Monsters. Buy it, you won't be disappointed.

 

[Brian Haughton]

I think the show would be better served by guests that aren't so "overplayed" on other shows. Jim Marrs practically lives on Dreamland and his 9/11 truth crap is sooooooooo boring; however, Nick Redfern doesn't seem to suffer the same over-saturation and his books are extremely thorough (although sometimes tedious). The problem with so many of these guests is that once you've heard their schtick once, you've heard it a hundred times because they seem to replay the same narrative again and again. The only difference with the Paracast is that Gene & David ask more critical questions; don't appear to be internet fanboys; and don't seemingly let the guest completely filibuster the show (however, Dr. Greer's appearance this week was a notable exception as he did fillibuster).

by the way, I noticed you left Nick Redfern's best book off the list: Three Men Seeking Monsters. Buy it, you won't be disappointed.

I will look out for that Nick Redfern book when I'm next in the UK. I know Marrs has been on the air a lot. But it's hard to find somebody interesting who hasn't. I know Nick Redfern has been on Jeff Rense a couple of times. Perhaps Paul Devereux - he of earth energies / ancient sacred landcapes would be a bit different.

 

[david_r_p]

Perhaps Paul Devereux - he of earth energies / ancient sacred landcapes would be a bit different.

I don't think I've heard or read any of him... Good stuff?

 

[Brian Haughton]

I don't think I've heard or read any of him... Good stuff?

It's fascinating stuff if you're interested in ancient monuments and earth mysteries. He's also one of the few writers on 'alternative' themes who has also produced peer-reviewed papers. A few of the books he's written are 'Stone Age Soundtracks - The Acoustic Archaeology of Ancient Sites', 'Places of Power: Measuring the Secret Energy of Ancient Sites', 'Mysterious Ancient America'. He's also written on UFOs, ley lines and fairy traditions. Perhaps he'd be a guest whose approach would be a bit different. Just a thought.

 

[david_r_p]

It's fascinating stuff if you're interested in ancient monuments and earth mysteries. He's also one of the few writers on 'alternative' themes who has also produced peer-reviewed papers. A few of the books he's written are 'Stone Age Soundtracks - The Acoustic Archaeology of Ancient Sites', 'Places of Power: Measuring the Secret Energy of Ancient Sites', 'Mysterious Ancient America'. He's also written on UFOs, ley lines and fairy traditions. Perhaps he'd be a guest whose approach would be a bit different. Just a thought.

thanks for the tip.

 

[mjw]

Guest idea - James Gilliland of www.eceti.org claims to have genuine video recorded sightings of ET craft and also to be in contact with ETs. Here is a video of him talking about eceti. I'm sure it sounds cultish but if he can back it up... Another clip here.