A lot of NARCAP members including myself participate in public forums but we/I don't often do it in our capacity as NARCAP members. Haines, Vallee and many of the others you mention have their own work and research that they promote and dialog about and as far as I know we are all careful to define our discussions as speculation or otherwise outside the NARCAP domain. There is a difference between what any of us suspects and what NARCAP offers as information. The only people that generally represent our work publicly are Dr. Haines and myself. I don't often participate in this forum at all and probably wouldn't be here now except for the interview.
-
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!
Ted Roe of NARCAP — June 8, 2014
- Thread starter wwkirk
- Start date
Free episodes:
A lot of NARCAP members including myself participate in public forums but we/I don't often do it in our capacity as NARCAP members. Haines, Vallee and many of the others you mention have their own work and research that they promote and dialog about and as far as I know we are all careful to define our discussions as speculation or otherwise outside the NARCAP domain. There is a difference between what any of us suspects and what NARCAP offers as information. The only people that generally represent our work publicly are Dr. Haines and myself. I don't often participate in this forum at all and probably wouldn't be here now except for the interview.
SRL+
Paranormal Adept
I can't recall if Vallee ever participated in a public "UFO" forum. Perhaps he has, and if so, I'd very much like to view it.
Burnt State
Paranormal Adept
It would not be accurate at all to categorize all Paracast members as uninterested in the work of NARCAP. In fact the core of the ongoing discussion on this forum for years now regarding strange unidentified objects in the sky is mostly about the tension of actual facts pertaining to the phenomenon and the mythos surrounding the history of cases that form the body of ufology. For the most part there is a very strong critical Zetetic perspective that is extremely interested in the work that your organization does. You represent a hardline investigation into a phenomenon we are all invested in. If anything, we have great hopes that organizations like yours and interviews and discussions on the show/forum will be a bridge between our wide ranging avid interests and researchers whose line of investigation is stringent and not associated with incredulous claims.
The waylaying argument with one member does not speak for us all nor are we all interested in getting emotional over acronyms. Overt fanboy statements don't help to bring clarity to the discussion. Han is not aggressive. All of that was just a bunch of missteps. After all it always takes two or three to tango. You might read the lack of response to the debate as a distaste for such pointless discussions that continue to reinforce the infighting in ufology that has plagued investigation into the phenomenon. Nothing thrills Paracast forum members more than guests who continue the discussion with us - we are very appreciative of your patience and willingness to engage as opposed to beating the dead horse of an argument. I'm sure that many appreciate your offer to continue to respond privately to our questions.
The forum is all about questions and comments. That's what drives the discussion. Your 2 cents is certainly worth much more given your own commitment to providing primary source documents of all kinds over many years. If anything, the UFO crowd is looking for direction, but is still trapped by the mythos, speculations and oft repeated tales. What the field needs right now more than ever is some strong leadership that will give shape and some orientation to a field riddled with a lack of legitimacy. Don't hold back. Few around here do, or they just stay silent, b/c no one likes the argument.
IsaacKoi
Paranormal Maven
The two UFO email discussion Lists that I had in mind in relation to Vallee are both private rather than public.
IsaacKoi
Paranormal Maven
That post was on the UFO Updates List which EBK used to run, which is now closed.
(With EBK's permission and support, I made the posts to that List available as a searchable PDF archive and set up a List to replace the Updates List).
PCarr
Paranormal Adept
API Case Files are interviewing Ted this week. Marsha Barnhart, our usual host, will be leading that. If you have any questions for Ted, there is a thread over on our subreddit or our community on G+, or you can DM me and I will forward your question to Marsha. There's not much time, so don't delay.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Thank you for your comments. Here's your answer:
Firstly, on the issue of grudges: Is it realistic or fair to think that grudges can be honestly resolved by telling the people affected that they cannot express themselves on the issue that led to the formation of the grudge in the first place? Personally, I'd tend to think most people would say "No." However, prior to my return, Gene contacted me and asked me not to come back to this thread, saying it had "run its course". So assuming I had any grudge in the first place, that probably wouldn't have been the best way to try to resolve it.
Secondly, the issue of how ufology is perceived by the media, and society in general, and how specific groups ( including NARCAP ) contribute to that perception is an important issue in ufology. So this topic will have run it's course when those who have a stake in the issue ( and that includes me ) have nothing more to say about it. Anything less is censorship. I'm not going to start walking around on eggshells because criticising NARCAP's image management strategy is now taboo. If Gene wants to censor me some more, that's his business. Telling readers how I see it backed by direct quotes, logic, and other evidence is mine.
Last edited:
And telling you that I don't agree with you, that NARCAP owes you nothing and that I have been far more accommodating than I need to be given your focus on finding fault, is mine. I have told you repeatedly that I am no longer interested in dealing with what you believe is most important. You want to run NARCAP, you should have been there 15years ago. I am not sharing control of my org with you and I am not discussing any aspect of our policy with you. You know nothing about who we are or why we do things the way we do. You can live with your misconceptions and your beliefs and you can stay away from me.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Maybe you didn't notice, but I wasn't talking to you ( here ), so if you're no longer interested in dealing with me, then you can certainly not discuss your policies all you want with me without interjecting to tell me how you're not going to do it. If you don't like what I have to say, then by all means use the ignore feature, and if you don't want me to post anything in response to you, then don't give me a reason. Simple.
Last edited:
Randall, give it a rest, OK?
Stagger Lee
Paranormal Adept
Nice to see you back Ufology/Randall. You've said your peace here in this thread- plenty others to dive into. Personally, I'd like to hear your take in the Flatwoods Monster thread- specifically in regards to your opinion if there exists a chance the whole incident itself was set up as the sicilian scarecrow of WWII- as Redferd suggests.
Randall please 'ignore' Ted Roe.
Ted please 'ignore' Randall.
Regardless of what has been said in the past etc it is self-evident that no agreement and no friendly discussion is going to happen so lets just draw a line under it now please.
Ted please 'ignore' Randall.
Regardless of what has been said in the past etc it is self-evident that no agreement and no friendly discussion is going to happen so lets just draw a line under it now please.
Sue
Paranormal Maven
Redferd? Not ... the Redferd, Nick Redferd? *faints*
Me, personally, I never make typos. No, on . . .
Polterwurst
Paranormal Adept
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
A funny suggestion
. However I can't help but point out that agreement isn't necessary, or for that matter even desirable. Why should I ( or anyone else ) be required to simply agree or be banned? That's just more BS. Disagreement brings issues into the light where they can be evaluated. Therefore, unless content drifts into the realm of the illegal ( not to be confused with civil matters ), then what just cause is there for censorship? Publishers can certainly exercise their discretion based on their power as owners, but power is a different concept than fairness or just cause isn't it?
Last edited:
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
I tried to find the Flatwoods Monster thread you mention above, but didn't have much luck. If you know where it is, can you please post the link?
A funny suggestion
Randall, I see nothing funny about it. You must (and Ted) accept that for whatever reason, relations are far from cordial between you. No-one is talking about banning or censorship - I am asking for you both to ignore each other. Both of you, not just one of you - I've given the same request to both so nobody is being singled out. I am not even asking anyone to not participate in any threads - you are free to participate anywhere, I am just trying to prevent constant back and forward of arguments and counter-arguments that nobody else is enjoying reading.
Han
piscator ψ
Dear Randall and Mr Roe, I politely request that you either aplogise to each other, or cease addressing each other directly.
My opinion is that the discourse between you is not constructive and is at a stalemate*
lets be honest: no one has covered themselves in glory during this debate, and it is high time to move on.
*"Repetition of position" or the "Threefold repetition rule"
My opinion is that the discourse between you is not constructive and is at a stalemate*
lets be honest: no one has covered themselves in glory during this debate, and it is high time to move on.
*"Repetition of position" or the "Threefold repetition rule"
SRL+
Paranormal Adept
What the hell are you talking about? This was never Randall Murphy’s thread to begin with. If you want, you can beg Randall to spew onto another thread. Once again, this has nothing to do with “stalemates” as this has to do with individuals who take this subject seriously, in an honest and objective manner. I hate having to point this out, as it should be so painfully obvious to those who understand.