Opinions on folks in the field...

[Soulcore]

I've been sitting here this hazy Saturday, listening to old Coast to Coast broadcasts and reading up on current sightings, and I wanted to get the board's opinion on a few folks.

One of the reasons I enjoy the paracast so much is how unafraid they are to call folks out on their bullshit (ie: Greer), and to give honest opinions on events and people. Plus I'm a fellow photoshop professional/ufo experiencer, so the show has a special place in my heart.

I got caught up in The Disclosure Project BS when I first saw it, and it took me YEARS to figure out that Greer was a fraud and had included amazingly UNcredible witnesses in with very credible ones. Clifford Stone is laughable. Anybody remember Tom Bearden?

So, what are the boards' thoughts on the likes of Whitely Strieiber, Linda Moulton Howe, Richard C. Hoagland, and Keith Morgan.

I was aware of Howe's work on cattle mutilation but am just now reading up on her EBE info. I've always thought Hoagland was a joke but I'm just now really looking into his credentials, so that's up in the air. Strieber is a mystery to me. I'm a Pinchbeck fan and I know he called him on his fear mongering, but I think he's had interesting and genuine experiences.

So, don't hold back, be honest. What do you guys think?

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I've been sitting here this hazy Saturday, listening to old Coast to Coast broadcasts and reading up on current sightings, and I wanted to get the board's opinion on a few folks.

One of the reasons I enjoy the paracast so much is how unafraid they are to call folks out on their bullshit (ie: Greer), and to give honest opinions on events and people. Plus I'm a fellow photoshop professional/ufo experiencer, so the show has a special place in my heart.

I got caught up in The Disclosure Project BS when I first saw it, and it took me YEARS to figure out that Greer was a fraud and had included amazingly UNcredible witnesses in with very credible ones. Clifford Stone is laughable. Anybody remember Tom Bearden?

So, what are the boards' thoughts on the likes of Whitely Strieiber, Linda Moulton Howe, Richard C. Hoagland, and Keith Morgan.

I was aware of Howe's work on cattle mutilation but am just now reading up on her EBE info. I've always thought Hoagland was a joke but I'm just now really looking into his credentials, so that's up in the air. Strieber is a mystery to me. I'm a Pinchbeck fan and I know he called him on his fear mongering, but I think he's had interesting and genuine experiences.

So, don't hold back, be honest. What do you guys think?

In large part you'll find many answers to your questions simply by using this forum's Search feature. We have already weighed in on the failures of Linda Moulton Howe -- particularly when it comes to the alleged "Drone" pictures -- and those of Richard C. Hoagland.

Once you do that, I think you'll see where you can fill in some more of your own ideas, OK?

 

[dorkbot]

We have already weighed in on the failures of...

Lately I've been thinking we need to coin a term that encapsulates the trend of researchers starting out with good work and then gradually going bad. It seems like there is a parallel to music where a band's first album or two are great and then they sell out, get fat and rich and produce inexplicable crap. There are genuine artists that remain relevant for their entire careers and there are One-Hit Wonders. Perhaps we could call it the "First Album Effect"?

 

[Brokko]

I'm pretty much a complete newbie: I did a search on the forum here, trying to find out more about [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Tom Bearden. Can anyone point me to a good evaluation of his credibility (or, evidently, lack of credibility?)

Thank you.

And thank you Gene and David - I feel like I've found a gold mine in discovering the Paracast. I'll be sending my friends your way. I genuinely appreciate your work and your balanced, rational perspective!
[/FONT]

 

[paraschtick]

I'm pretty much a complete newbie: I did a search on the forum here, trying to find out more about [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Tom Bearden. Can anyone point me to a good evaluation of his credibility (or, evidently, lack of credibility?)[/FONT]

Tom Bearden. Woah ... I have an inkling that some of the electromagnetism stuff he talks about on his website http://www.cheniere.org is possibly ok ... but then there is some right silly stuff to do with the Russians attacking the US with their weather weapons and things. Why?? Why would they do that?? The cold war finished some time ago. Doesn't make any sense to me.

And there are pictures of cloud patterns which apparently show the scalar weapons signature. Nope ... I see some clouds , Tom ... oh and a sheep ... oh and a really really big Burt Reynolds.

I'm just getting into the totally odd scalar/longitudinal wave thing so I'm no expert (although I did do some electromagnetism at university some 20 years ago ... and had lectures in the James Clerk Maxwell Building at the University of Edinburgh ) through listening to Joseph Farrell interviews and such ... but I have a feeling that there is some truth in it all.

For instance, I'm very slowly starting to go through some old JCM texts and things on quaternions which is what JCM used to build his electromagnetism ideas, and which were dropped by Heaviside (i think) to create a more simplified form of electromagnetic theory. Hmmm ... it makes you think that possibly Heaviside dropped some interesting stuff as well on the way to make electromagnetism palatable to university students???

Anyway, I'm sure there are people out there better than me who can give you an idea of whether Tom Bearden is just another in a very long line of fruit baskets or not.

As these things go, I think its a bit of everything ... and stranger than you would suppose.

 

[Brokko]

Thanks, Paraschtick. I am learning that everything needs to be filtered to get at the nuggets of truth - and even then there is no guarantee of truth, just varying degrees of likelihood. Sorting the wacky fabrications from the weird-but-true is part of what makes digging into these topics interesting.

 

[Stillborn]

I've been sitting here this hazy Saturday, listening to old Coast to Coast broadcasts and reading up on current sightings, and I wanted to get the board's opinion on a few folks.

One of the reasons I enjoy the paracast so much is how unafraid they are to call folks out on their bullshit (ie: Greer), and to give honest opinions on events and people. Plus I'm a fellow photoshop professional/ufo experiencer, so the show has a special place in my heart.

I got caught up in The Disclosure Project BS when I first saw it, and it took me YEARS to figure out that Greer was a fraud and had included amazingly UNcredible witnesses in with very credible ones. Clifford Stone is laughable. Anybody remember Tom Bearden?

So, what are the boards' thoughts on the likes of Whitely Strieiber, Linda Moulton Howe, Richard C. Hoagland, and Keith Morgan.

I was aware of Howe's work on cattle mutilation but am just now reading up on her EBE info. I've always thought Hoagland was a joke but I'm just now really looking into his credentials, so that's up in the air. Strieber is a mystery to me. I'm a Pinchbeck fan and I know he called him on his fear mongering, but I think he's had interesting and genuine experiences.

So, don't hold back, be honest. What do you guys think?

Question every researcher. Consider none of what they say as gospel. Get used to being puzzled and not coming to rock solid conclusions. That's what I think. Dick Hoagland, ignore, LMH, ignore. Whitley, may have had some weird shit, but he's now too weird to know. Morgan, I recognize his name, but can't recall the details. Same with Pinchbeck, but I have a nagging sense he's a douche for whatever reason. But question my comments, and think for yourself after doing research.

 

[Tommy Allison]

I'm of the mind you can easily tell the frauds from the genuine articles by simply looking at the way they conduct themselves, or their works.

For example. If someone writes a book called "Everything you know is Wrong", you can better believe that the person who wrote it, is a fucking idiot. If you see people with their hand out for more research money, chances are, it's a scam.

If you see a guy wearing a cowboy hat, issuing manifestos from Prague about how he's going to sue people for fraud and what not, you can take it to the bank he's full of shit.

There are websites upon websites devoted to debunking the frauds in this business.

When you see a guy giving away info for free, or taking THEIR time and resources and putting it into real research, that's when you might be on to a genuine researcher.

If they're selling books, DVD's and other shit, chances are they too are just panderers and bullshitters.

I can write all day along about how I was abducted by aliens, and how they want to save the world. I could find a dozen publishers, and demand all kinds of attention and what not, and be completely full of shit.

I've seen so many bullshitters in this business it's not even funny, and the funniest part, is that these pricks are considered the Go To Guys in the field. The best thing anyone can do, is do your own research. Compare notes with other people you see on the net, and for fuck's sake do not share anything with anyone until you know what you have is of quality and credibility.

That's my viewpoint. Sounds harsh, but I have a high standard for what piques my curiosity.

 

[Gareth]

I get what everyone says about the title of Lloyd Pye's book... but to me that just seems like a publisher imposed title.

What do you think? I guess he had to come up with the content for the book first.

 

[Schuyler]

I get what everyone says about the title of Lloyd Pye's book... but to me that just seems like a publisher imposed title.

What do you think? I guess he had to come up with the content for the book first.

Yup. I doesn't matter what title the author comes up with or how many times he's asked what the title should be, the publisher still imposes a title. An author's royaty is about 10% and that's just about how much input an author gets as well.

 

[Stillborn]

Oh, is Pinchbeck the guy that got in a feud with Whitley Strieber awhile back on Whitley's show?