The Lance Moody Skeptical Files: We'll Keep the Light on for You!

[pixelsmith]

I think "dumbass" was what got him grounded. Hopefully, it's because it was used in a caustic context. If not, I can't be long for this forum; I've had sailor mouth since I was five years old.

"dumb bass" might not get you banned... try it!

 

[nameless]

Lance, I know your out there man. I dont mean to rag on you but.. i got a confession to make. and maybe cos your not here i can .. you know, feel free to .....release...uhh without fear.
I know it sounds crazy man but. . I think one time i saw another me. i mean it was like a doppleganger. like another person like me but an alien. i cant be sure but it looked EXACTLY like me but kinda back to front, like the left side was the right side and words on my tee where back to front. i know it sounds whacky an all but..
anyway i've sent photos off for analysis and um...
I'M STARTING MY OWN WEBSITE/RADIO SHOW NEWS LETTER SHINDIG. AND AM GETTING SOME UNQUALIFIED DUDES TO TAKE A LOOK AT MY SHIT. there i said it.
pleasedontbeatmeup.

 

[ProphetofOccam]

Obviously you didn't have my old man ....

No. I had mine. Barring the legitimacy of certain time travel theories bouncing around the forums, I find it highly unlikely that he was also yours.

 

[Wade]

Fortunately for us there is no shortage of previous posts by lance to keep us entertained until he makes bail. Oh looky here, here's a good repeat,check out post #6

From: Louis Jarvis | The Paracast Community Forums

 

[Goggs Mackay]

The Lance thing is weird. I've told him more than once that he has plenty intelligence and dilligence and basically, if Lance says something related to a topic or case, you can usually bet your bottom dollar that he got off his ass to check his facts. I have told him that his opinions are valued and that if his facts are correct, all he need do is to put those facts down on paper (or post them here) - why o why does he always come across as this sarcastic, superior ass when the damage he intends to do should be based solely on the rights and wrongs of the subject.

I had no idea there might be alcohol involved and I'm not making assumptions about whether there might be a drinking problem etc, plenty in my own extended family have drunk too much and they are inevitably terrible bores when drunk, even when they are great sober. They always think they are stating the only correct opinion and everyone else is wrong etc...it's such an unattractive quality. I cannot stand 'bad' drinkers. I have zero doubt the novel 'Jekyll and Hyde' was doubt written by someone with personal experience living with an alcoholic, who is as nice as pie sober and a completely different animal with even just a few beers down the hatch.

Skeptics who cherry-pick cases are cowardly in that they avoid 'hard to explain away' cases like the plague. If someone has a real conviction that there is nothing to this UFO business, there should be no case they won't tackle. No-one expects a skeptic to be able to answer what countless other people cannot, i.e what are these objects/lights seen in the sky. It's easy to laugh at Billy Meier or Adamski, laugh at silly hoaxes or witnesses with wild stories but no evidence - anyone can do that.
But can they explain sightings by multiple sober and drug-free pilots with simultaneous radar tracks from different radar stations? No, the skeptics cannot and they don't even try....

I have hinted before that I find the zeal of some skeptics, like Lance but not just him, hard to work out. If they genuinely put UFOs in the same box as magic beans and Harry Potter, i.e pure fantasy, then it just doesn't make sense to spend so much time trying to convince everyone of their views.
Someone who does not believe in magic beans is just not going to go looking for places where people talk about the reality of magic beans and rip them apart day after day, because it would be an exercise in futility, non-productive and an utter waste of intelligence. What does Lance gain personally from coming back time and time again to slag people off? What does anyone gain by constantly slagging others off?
I just cannot help thinking it is a symptom of another problem entirely. Bullies are often the most insecure people around, deflecting perceived criticism of themselves onto others, cos they often cannot handle any criticism themselves.

I wish to be clear that I am not making assumptions about Lance's reasons for posting etc - it's just his name as a skeptic in this community makes me think about the zealous skeptic type that can be found anywhere.

I personally would happily see Lance back, so long as he stops getting personal and nasty as their is just no call for that at all.

Lance, if you are reading - your posts are valued but not the personal ridicule, re-join and try and be a little kinder when posting - it won't diminish your argument but it will enhance your own self with everyone else.

 

[nameless]

The Lance thing is weird. I've told him more than once that he has plenty intelligence and dilligence and basically, if Lance says something related to a topic or case, you can usually bet your bottom dollar that he got off his ass to check his facts. I have told him that his opinions are valued and that if his facts are correct, all he need do is to put those facts down on paper (or post them here) - why o why does he always come across as this sarcastic, superior ass when the damage he intends to do should be based solely on the rights and wrongs of the subject.

I had no idea there might be alcohol involved and I'm not making assumptions about whether there might be a drinking problem etc, plenty in my own extended family have drunk too much and they are inevitably terrible bores when drunk, even when they are great sober. They always think they are stating the only correct opinion and everyone else is wrong etc...it's such an unattractive quality. I cannot stand 'bad' drinkers. I have zero doubt the novel 'Jekyll and Hyde' was doubt written by someone with personal experience living with an alcoholic, who is as nice as pie sober and a completely different animal with even just a few beers down the hatch.

Skeptics who cherry-pick cases are cowardly in that they avoid 'hard to explain away' cases like the plague. If someone has a real conviction that there is nothing to this UFO business, there should be no case they won't tackle. No-one expects a skeptic to be able to answer what countless other people cannot, i.e what are these objects/lights seen in the sky. It's easy to laugh at Billy Meier or Adamski, laugh at silly hoaxes or witnesses with wild stories but no evidence - anyone can do that.
But can they explain sightings by multiple sober and drug-free pilots with simultaneous radar tracks from different radar stations? No, the skeptics cannot and they don't even try....

I have hinted before that I find the zeal of some skeptics, like Lance but not just him, hard to work out. If they genuinely put UFOs in the same box as magic beans and Harry Potter, i.e pure fantasy, then it just doesn't make sense to spend so much time trying to convince everyone of their views.
Someone who does not believe in magic beans is just not going to go looking for places where people talk about the reality of magic beans and rip them apart day after day, because it would be an exercise in futility, non-productive and an utter waste of intelligence. What does Lance gain personally from coming back time and time again to slag people off? What does anyone gain by constantly slagging others off?
I just cannot help thinking it is a symptom of another problem entirely. Bullies are often the most insecure people around, deflecting perceived criticism of themselves onto others, cos they often cannot handle any criticism themselves.

I wish to be clear that I am not making assumptions about Lance's reasons for posting etc - it's just his name as a skeptic in this community makes me think about the zealous skeptic type that can be found anywhere.

I personally would happily see Lance back, so long as he stops getting personal and nasty as their is just no call for that at all.

Lance, if you are reading - your posts are valued but not the personal ridicule, re-join and try and be a little kinder when posting - it won't diminish your argument but it will enhance your own self with everyone else.

i hear what your saying goggs, but
your a stinky poo head too.

 

[nameless]

Anyone remember this;

Just so folks know, I've decided to ban Lance Moody, I'm tired of his shit. While he might make some decent points, he comes off as an abusive dickhead, and I have little patience for this kind of noise. Sorry if anyone thinks I'm being a bit reactive, but I've reached my threshold with him.

dB

Some words of love and light from The Biednymeister there.

 

[mike]

Your house your rules, but imo having a go at the guy while he doesnt have a right of reply doesnt cover anyone in much glory either.

Lance and i agree on some things and disagree on others, kicking him while hes down is poor form folks

 

[Muadib]

Your house your rules, but imo having a go at the guy while he doesnt have a right of reply doesnt cover anyone in much glory either.

Lance and i agree on some things and disagree on others, kicking him while hes down is poor form folks

Gonna go ahead and give this a big QFE. How lame can you possibly be O'Brien? Ban the guy and then start a thread so you can giggle about him behind his back like a bunch of schoolgirls? Talk about immature. Waaaah, somebody doesn't think like me, waaaaah. Is this what these forums have become? How utterly childish and ridiculous. Not to mention, that's some really nasty speculation that the guy has a drinking problem, especially when you have absolutely zero evidence to back it up. That's like me saying " I think such and such is a heroin addict because they're always so calm." What nonsense. I have a feeling I'll probably get banned for this post, but I'd rather be banned then participate in this circle jerk. Have fun.

 

[mike]

Please un ban him

 

[boomerang]

Is there a "Don't Give A Fig" button here somewhere?

 

[Gene Steinberg]

We need one.

 

[Jimi H.]

...Not to mention, that's some really nasty speculation that the guy has a BEEP problem, especially when you have absolutely zero evidence to back it up. ...

Yea, I'm flabbergasted. First ban then slander!? And the host says the banned poster needs to chill on the personal attacks?! Huh?
Hypocrisy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If the poster was using a handle, no harm done, but that is not the case.

Suggestion to admins: Delete/edit posts about said topic.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Lance can still read the posts and he will be back I reckon. Lance loves his regular fix of exposing crap cases and outright hoaxes!
(and in the immortal words of children worldwide, 'he started it...'

 

[Stagger Lee]

Lance can still read the posts and he will be back I reckon. Lance loves his regular fix of exposing crap cases and outright hoaxes!
(and in the immortal words of children worldwide, 'he started it...'

Shill.com will simply fix him up with a new screenname- that, or recruit another shill to take his place. No harm done.

 

[Polterwurst]

I think one time i saw another me. i mean it was like a doppleganger. like another person like me but an alien. i cant be sure but it looked EXACTLY like me but kinda back to front, like the left side was the right side and words on my tee where back to front.

Impossible. There can't be two of your kind.

 

[Wade]

I don't think anyone here need shed a tear over lance's temporary absence from the forum.

I'll state right here I have enough faith in chris (or any of the other moderators) to decide when enough is enough as far as forum decorum. It wasn't that long ago that chris and lance got into a pretty testy exchange over chris appearance on a reality show and lance did come off pretty strong and if there was something personal like a vendetta on chris's part then (rightly or wrongly) that would have been the time to pull the plug on lance, but he didn't so I'm sure this wasn't a knee jerk reactionary action on chris's part , whatever the cause of this one was probably egregious.

Lance had been through this before and he'll go through it again. He knows he's probably on a short chain and push and test his limits and pay the price and be banned and come roaring back, it's a game with him, if he didn't like the rules he wouldn't keep coming back. As goggs said you can make a good point without being personal about it, no matter how nuanced or indirect it may be, many of the people weighing in on this thread have done exactly that and are still here to post. True, lance isn't here to defend himself but he WOULD be (like everyone else here) if he didn't do what he did, and again I have enough faith...a dirty word around here...in the moderators to determine what the limits of free expression here are, like mike alluded to it's their house, perhaps if my taxes went into the upkeep I'd feel more strident about my "rights" here but that is not the case, and therefore if I were ever to be banned for language or any other misconduct I'd unconditionally accept my departure because I'd be satisfied in knowing whatever I did to get banned was worth it

Yes, we are all big boys and girls and unfortunately aren't all blessed with thick skins and/or non existent egos but maybe in this case the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Can I offer forum decorum as a band (not banned) name?

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Gonna go ahead and give this a big QFE. How lame can you possibly be O'Brien? Ban the guy and then start a thread so you can giggle about him behind his back like a bunch of schoolgirls? Talk about immature. Waaaah, somebody doesn't think like me, waaaaah. Is this what these forums have become? How utterly childish and ridiculous. Not to mention, that's some really nasty speculation that the guy has a drinking problem, especially when you have absolutely zero evidence to back it up. That's like me saying " I think such and such is a heroin addict because they're always so calm." What nonsense. I have a feeling I'll probably get banned for this post, but I'd rather be banned then participate in this circle jerk. Have fun.

I never said he had a drinking problem, I've just noticed that he seems much more aggressive and thin-skinned later on in the evening. The thread wasn't meant as a circle-jerk, giggle—fest, rather it was meant as a way to post skeptical stories under one thread. You are fairly new here and haven't had to deal w/ the guy's attitude for years, as some of us have. He has already been banned three times. IMO: he needs to chill and perhaps find a life that doesn't include haughty, condescending treatment of posters and guests on boards that cover subjects he abhors. That's my opinion, and the opinion of many others here. He's had countless warnings and we've been nice enough to allow him back in, but as a result of his continuing attacks and name calling, he's on a short leash. If you don't like our policies, you don't have to post here. You won't get banned for your post, you didn't break any forum policy rules. **creative flaming hint** using the term "like a..." like you did, instead of "you're a..." is acceptable, But, if you don't play nice here, you'll get a warning, If Gene likes you you might get a second. After that, you get banned. The more you get banned, the shorter and tighter the leash. It's Gene's call. I've handed out a number of warnings, but I've never actually banned anyone. I don't even know how. As to Lance being the topic of conversation and him not being able to defend himself, oh well... As to Me wanting Lance to read this thread. I meant that sincerely. I plan to post stories and topics that show the more skeptical side of issues. I trust you don't have a problem with that.

 

[nameless]

i see this as a steam letting off session. Lance has a place in all our hearts and many of the characters on here do. we rag on each other and sometimes if they step over the mark it comes back three fold. at the end of the day, there is NO BLOOD SPILT and the reality of all this is that a bunch of dis-functional nerd-do-wells with too much time on their hands and not enough sci-fi satiating are sitting around talking shit whilst a bunch of evil scum bags are matrixing our lives for a buck and a hand job, ruining the planet and disrupting our spiritual and evolutionary progression. capish?

i love you guys. you to lance.

 

[Jimi H.]

I'm new here, but I'm not new to listening to the Paracast, I've heard 'em all.

One thing I've heard many times on the show is how you can't kill a UFO/para-topic regardless of how ridiculous it is. I heard the moans and the groans of sane minds lashing out, and I like it.

I can wait a lifetime for the really solid stuff. Until then, let's call a spade a spade.

Sooner or later, there has to be a consequence for those behind BS-stories. E.g. when it comes to the paper-thin 'Bigfoot' DNA study, why not kill it off, as it deserves? 30$ to 'peer-review' their 'study'? Really?

Why not say it like is?

Why come down on Lance for living up to the creed that BS should be dealt with decisively and brutally, isn't that what the show has preached? Isn't that exactly what heightens the quality and credibility of the whole deal here?