• 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!

Some pix

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Elendil

Elendil

Paranormal Maven
Remember the old skeptic argument that all the evidence there is on the reality of the UFOs sums up to a couple of blurry pictures and grainy videos? Well, I sure was surprised awhile ago when I saw some stuff on ufoevidence.org. Nice pictures, indeed. Too bad that anything can be hoaxed today so not much to rejoice there. But still, I'd like to post some for you guys to comment on. Are any of these known hoaxes?

I love this one. It very well might be a rendered object, but it looks very good to me. And I love the pictures where the UFO is above the tree. If someone hoaxed this, he did a very good job. Looks rather convincing to my untrained eye.

And how about this? It looks like to pots welded together and maybe afterwards thrown into the air. I always remember that bastard Shermer and his experiment with some stuff which was tossed and photographed. Damn that man. I sure hope guys like him are not right...:D

And the last one. I remember thinking a long time ago that there really are no pictures out there which are not grainy or badly focused or something. And then I got the internet...
 
As for the first pic, I've seen the exact same "ufo" pasted onto other backgrounds, exact same color, size, tilt, etc.....
 
Elendil said:
It looks like to pots welded together and maybe afterwards thrown into the air.
Click to expand...

The story on that one is an excellent read. You're right though, it looks like two pots welded together and thrown into the air. The long shot could have been done by catapulting the thing and catching it on the decent.

Elendil said:
I remember thinking a long time ago that there really are no pictures out there which are not grainy or badly focused or something. And then I got the internet...
Click to expand...

This looks pretty much exactly like the Ed Walters UFO of Gulf Breeze infamy. I think Bruce Maccabee thought the Walter's photos were genuine. Does anyone know if he changed his position? The Walter's case has a bizarre abduction component to it as well.
 
trainedobserver said:
This looks pretty much exactly like the Ed Walters UFO of Gulf Breeze infamy. I think Bruce Maccabee thought the Walter's photos were genuine. Does anyone know if he changed his position? The Walter's case has a bizarre abduction component to it as well.
Click to expand...

The text below that one says it was taken in Wisconsin by someone else, not Ed Walters. Well, a couple of months ago I listened to the show with Maccabee, I think it was the one from 2007, and there was some talk about Walters but for the love of me I can't recall the details and his position in the end.
 
Christopher O'Brien said:
Naw, he got paid off with WAY too much money to change his tune about GB.
Click to expand...

Huh? Please elaborate.

---------- Post added at 11:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 AM ----------
Elendil said:
The text below that one says it was taken in Wisconsin by someone else, not Ed Walters.
Click to expand...

I know, that is what struck me about it. Isn't it odd that most UFOs are unique? While there are instances where UFO shapes/designs seem to appear more than once or to more than one photographer isn't in incredibly curious that most UFOs are unique to the event or the experiencer? Cases such as this one and replications of the distinct Adamski and Meier ships are the only "reoccurring" designs, other than vague disks, cylinders, and blobs of light, that I can recall offhand. A lot of evidence points to Adamski and Meier being hoaxers and of course there has similar evidence against the Walters case as well which makes these "repeats" highly suspect.
 
trainedobserver said:
Huh? Please elaborate..
Click to expand...


He had 10% of the book sales! That was the deal. I think I heard it on a DRM Friday show from a couple of months back and Randle's mentioned it in his blog.

There's an image that's always been front page on hyper.net....confusingly it isn't there now I want to link it! It's been there for bloody ages. It's a sepia looking image from the 50s of a disc-shaped object flying right to left and leaving a huge exhaust plume. I'd like to know the story behind that one.
 
Christopher O'Brien said:
It's been rumored that he was also paid a five figure amount up front as well. Shades of the dragon queen & the Brazil/Urandir abduction hoax.
Click to expand...

I find Maccabee to be elusive and hard to pin down. His analyses, especially the Skylab red satellite, are great reading and his site is one I've read top to bottom despite a couple of bum links. In that sense, he's a reputable man and interesting to look into.

On the other hand, there's a few guys, like yourself, who imply he's a less than objective researcher and possibly more interested in money than integrity. I know he's done presentations for the CIA and that doesn't bother me much. Others see it as a confirmation that he's possibly on the 'disinfo' payroll. Lot's of conflicting opinions...

What I'm trying to say is that I can't make my mind up. Every UFO researcher eventually supports a case that others dismiss and that sometimes leads to speculation of who's gold they receive. Maybe Gulf Breeze was his? Stan's got the MJ-12 and it's probably better if I don't air my thoughts on a couple of others, but you get my point.

'Dragon Queen' imo has a reverse Midas-touch to the point that her support of anything since the mutes suggests it's either misinterpreted or plain wrong. :D
 
Kandinsky said:
Every UFO researcher eventually supports a case that others dismiss and that sometimes leads to speculation of who's gold they receive.
Click to expand...
Dang! If that's true, then what's my Achilles Heel Case and where the hell is MY gold? I'm STILL waiting for them MIB dudes to show up w/ a large Samsonite filled w/ stacks of used Ben Franklins, *grumble*

---------- Post added at 12:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:44 PM ----------
Kandinsky said:
'Dragon Queen' imo has a reverse Midas-touch to the point that her support of anything since the mutes suggests it's either misinterpreted or plain wrong. :D
Click to expand...
IMO she's wrong about the cows as well! Genetic material? I got yer genetic material-- just go raid the slaughterhouses for blood, udders, eyes and ears etc...
 
Christopher O'Brien said:
IMO she's wrong about the cows as well! Genetic material? I got yer genetic material-- just go raid the slaughterhouses for blood, etc.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Much of the presumed behavior of ETs in the way of abductions, mutilations, and messages containing dime-store philosophy or doomsday predictions make little or no sense for a civilization at our degree of technological advancement much less a more advanced one.

"We, of the council of 38-D, having transversed the vast interstellar void, greet you with the cosmic wisdom of the ages, namely that you monkeys are pooping where you eat ...stop it. All we require of you for this service is a few dozen bovine body parts, a little interspecies hybridization, and some water so we can make some pancakes."
 
Lemme see I'f I'm getting you guys right: so Maccabee first said that Walters was a hoaxer and that the Gulf Breeze stuff is shite and then he got payed by the publisher and changed the tune?

Why wasn't that ever mentioned on the Paracast when he was a guest? :)
 
Back
Top