• 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!

Paracast Guest- Stan Romanek?

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Vimana

Vimana

Paranormal Maven
As a resident of Denver I was wondering if there would be value in having Stan Romanek as a Guest?

Before you all kill me- hear me out.

It seems fairly obvious this guy is a hoaxer, with some malevolent issues. Should we (as the Paracast) take him down the road of hard questions? Is there a value in hearing a hoaxer defrauded?

I enjoy listening to the PC whether it's someone I agree with, or not. I enjoy hearing my allies (Chris & Gene) take down a fraudulent hoaxer as much as I do hearing about never & revelatory work.

Something about this Romanek fellow makes me coil up, as if to strike.
 
I'll look in the archives. I had a feeling he was on. In light of the Dr. Jacobs discussion I wanted to look at some really infamous types.

As usual I will trust Gene and Chris to bring us the goods. I am trying to speak up more in the forums but certainly every idea is not a good one! lol.

I do think controversy stirs the gerbils. And the gerbils need to be stirred.
 
Vimana said:
...I do think controversy stirs the gerbils. And the gerbils need to be stirred.
Click to expand...
V, don't forget that our reputation proceeds us and it has become increasingly difficult to book guests who know they have holes in their scenarios—the type of holy guests we enjoy drilling down upon—exploring from time-to time. Stan R. is one of many...

Thanks, we're always here listening to your guest suggestions...
 
Vimana said:
I'll look in the archives. I had a feeling he was on. In light of the Dr. Jacobs discussion I wanted to look at some really infamous types.

As usual I will trust Gene and Chris to bring us the goods. I am trying to speak up more in the forums but certainly every idea is not a good one! lol.

I do think controversy stirs the gerbils. And the gerbils need to be stirred.
Click to expand...
Red Pill Junkie should do a cartoon of stirred gerbils.
 
Why you always on about Alien's Stan?? ... "I want to be one"

"What!!!"

Sorry. I couldn't help a bit of silliness here. Can anyone name the film I'm parodying??
 
Last edited:
When I saw this thread I had to take a deep breath. Romanek? Really? I have serious doubts he would want to talk on some podcast considering the charges he is facing. Besides, it's Romanek and his ilk that have given Ufology such a bad name.
 
What is the latest regarding those troubling allegations against Stan? I certainly do not think a deliberate smear campaign against him is out of the realm of possibility but I'll just wait and see if a court decides anything.
 
Goggs Mackay said:
What is the latest regarding those troubling allegations against Stan? I certainly do not think a deliberate smear campaign against him is out of the realm of possibility but I'll just wait and see if a court decides anything.
Click to expand...

Romanek has a pretrial motions hearing today. I believe that trial is scheduled for January, but I am not sure if that remains current. Both things are of interest to me so I hope to find out more about the hearing. The trial has been postponed numerous times - last March, the court found Romanek competent enough to proceed - but perhaps it will actually go forward in the near future.

http://www.larimer.org/da/CaseTrackingSummary.pdf

Interestingly enough, Brian Koopman (one of the detectives involved in the Romanek case) is facing unrelated charges and has a status conference on the 23 of this month. I don't think that Koopman's problems will affect the case against Romanek, other than I cannot imagine the prosecutor calling him as a witness.
 
Last edited:
Stan has actually been on camera and speaks about why he "so called" discredited himself, he claims a close friend of his died. He then got a call asking him to discredit himself or more of his friends and family would be killed. It's an interesting watch, here it is.
 
Regardless of whether Stan's UFO encounters have any credibility, just the fact he is a well-known paid speaker on the conference circuit, having a book or two and DVD out. I can completely believe anyone in power who is against UFO truth going as far as setting someone up to be discredited in the worst way - the charges against Stan are near the top of the 'worst' list and he'll never be invited to speak on UFOs again, even if a court of law finds him not guilty.

I am not a supporter or believer of Stan, far from it, I just know that this field has some extremely worrying elements that rise to the surface every now and then so I really hope that he isn't found guilty of crimes he did not commit. If he committed the crimes then I won't shed a tear over his incarceration etc. Let's just not judge him either way until he has his day in court, cos we are all entitled to that at least.
 
AlienHunter said:
Stan has actually been on camera and speaks about why he "so called" discredited himself, he claims a close friend of his died. He then got a call asking him to discredit himself or more of his friends and family would be killed. It's an interesting watch, here it is.
Click to expand...
I wish Stan & Lisa the best, they are genuinely good people. I had spent time with them and personally witnessed some "high strangeness" in his presence.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top