• 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!

Whitley Strieber: Is he for real?

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

in response to nameless you make a good point with skinwalker.
But the difference between Whitley's supposed encounters and those of the skinwalker visitors and investigators is he seems to only make admissions when the subject is presented to him.
If hes on a show and a caller tells of their black eyed kid encounter, his reply will be of a situation that happened to him several years earlier.
With all the appearances he has had on radio, not to mention his own show, I find it hard to believe that he never found the opportunity to bring that sort of thing up years ago if the encounter happened when he claimed it did. Its not like he can claim bashfulness at this point, right?
 
there is the criticism, and it makes it easy to be cynical, that he is just "selling books". but he seems to be pretty straight forward about his experiences as being real. I think with that in mind he should meet Gene and Chris. If only just to talk out the different possibilities of his experiences. There is absolutely no point arguing the true or false case with this stuff which occupies a middle place between the material and the imaterial, it becomes irrelevent when faced with experiences that are beyond normal and unverifiable. The only thing we are left with is the sincerity of his testimony as case evidence. It may have consequence or be of some help. it may not. To go on a radio show to argue the point is probably meaningless and imaterial to him and not really worth it for us. but to extrapolate and examine theories within the context of his world and experiences might be a more interesting way to go.
 
dankaholic said:
in response to nameless you make a good point with skinwalker.
But the difference between Whitley's supposed encounters and those of the skinwalker visitors and investigators is he seems to only make admissions when the subject is presented to him.
If hes on a show and a caller tells of their black eyed kid encounter, his reply will be of a situation that happened to him several years earlier.
With all the appearances he has had on radio, not to mention his own show, I find it hard to believe that he never found the opportunity to bring that sort of thing up years ago if the encounter happened when he claimed it did. Its not like he can claim bashfulness at this point, right?
Click to expand...
righhht
yeah thats like some annoying uncle who has an anecdote about everything you ever say.
"aw damn i just tread in a dog turd.."
-"dog turd you say? that reminds me of the time i ate a dog turd in a Guatamala death camp ..etc."

it does seem quite bandwagony. it may also be an empathic linguistic mechanism to counterattack feelings of psychopathy.
 
The day Whitley Strieber shows up on the Paracast, is the day when he shows up on Gene Steinberg’s doorstep in a cheetah thong. The man ate five grams of mushrooms then met ET. If he won’t even bother to answer pointed questions, why should anyone take him seriously.
 
I think that every negative message in these forums makes Strieber less inclined to want to be on the show. But that's how it goes. He has been at this game long enough to take criticism.
 
Gene Steinberg said:
I think that every negative message in these forums makes Strieber less inclined to want to be on the show. But that's how it goes. He has been at this game long enough to take criticism.
Click to expand...

It's not like the people on the forum are going to be conducting the interview. If Mr. Strieber has a problem with anything but blind acquiescence to the reality of his situation, I'd say he would be being a tad bit overly sensitive to say the least. It doesn't make sense to me that he would be upset at someone questioning the reality of his experiences when he's questioned the reality of the experiences himself in his books...
 
S.R.L. said:
The day Whitley Strieber shows up on the Paracast, is the day when he shows up on Gene Steinberg’s doorstep in a cheetah thong. The man ate five grams of mushrooms then met ET. If he won’t even bother to answer pointed questions, why should anyone take him seriously.
Click to expand...

I'd hope this is sarcastic, where do you get the idea that he was on drugs? It's one thing to question the reality of what happened to him, it's quite another to accuse him of being under the influence with no proof...
 
Apparently Mr. Strieber was on psilocybin when encountering ET, according to the late Terence Mckenna, who mentions this in the clip entitled, “Shamanic Approaches to the UFO”. As there were a number of attendees at this conference, including Jacques Vallee, I am of the opinion that Mckenna was confident of his statements. To quote McKenna, in relation to Strieber : ”This is not to put down Whitley’s story which is a very interesting story, but had he prefaced his story with the comment, that before it all happened he took five grams of mushrooms, I doubt he could have sold it to his mother.” I would very much like someone, somewhere to ask Mr. Strieber about this.

Here’s the video in which you may find Mckenna’s comments interesting. I’m sorry to have dashed your hope.

 
S.R.L. said:
Apparently Mr. Strieber was on psilocybin when encountering ET, according to the late Terence Mckenna, who mentions this in the clip entitled, “Shamanic Approaches to the UFO”. As there were a number of attendees at this conference, including Jacques Vallee, I am of the opinion that Mckenna was confident of his statements. To quote McKenna, in relation to Strieber : ”This is not to put down Whitley’s story which is a very interesting story, but had he prefaced his story with the comment, that before it all happened he took five grams of mushrooms, I doubt he could have sold it to his mother.” I would very much like someone, somewhere to ask Mr. Strieber about this.

Here’s the video in which you may find Mckenna’s comments interesting. I’m sorry to have dashed your hope.
Click to expand...

Lol, you certainly haven't dashed my hope, I have no vested interest concerning this case, however I do have some problems with your interpretation. First of all, if Mckenna was actually accusing Strieber of being on mushrooms (which I doubt and I'll explain why...) it's second hand hearsay, and Terrence Mckenna, no offense to the man, said a lot of things. How would he know whether Strieber took mushrooms or not, unless Strieber told him so, and why would Strieber do that knowing it would completely destroy any attempt to paint his experience as something that actually happened, as opposed to something that just happened in his mind? Already, it makes 0 sense. Now, on to what's actually going on here: the quote makes it seem like he's making a comparison, not accusing Strieber of actually taking mushrooms. It seems to me that he's making a comment on the validity of psychedelic experiences. IE people will believe that Whitley had a strange experience but if he said he'd had a strange experience because he took mushrooms, no one would be interested in his story.

I'd also like to point out another part that makes no sense whatsoever, as Mr Striebers story has always been that he was awakened at 3 in the morning when he experienced his first abduction. One does not eat 5 grams of mushrooms and go to sleep. You would know this if you looked into it further, or had any personal experience with psychedelics. One of their side effects is sleeplessness and a stimulant like effect while under their influence. What you're proposing is ludicrous. On top of that, I've done a lot of Googling to see if anyone else has brought this up, and haven't been able to find a single reference to anyone besides you accusing Strieber of being under the influence of psychedelics during his initial experiences. So what is more likely, that you're the only person who heard that comment by Mckenna and nobody else, not even one single skeptic that I could find, has brought up what would seem to me to be the easiest way in the world of proving that his initial experience had no basis in reality, or that you've taken the comment out of context? My money is on the second option.
 
I have to agree, in all the years ive been following the case, reading his books and listening to his podcasts, ive not once that i can recall, heard him say hes taken mushrooms or anything similar.
 
Perhaps Mckenna’s statement was taken out of context, when presented with the alternative. It wouldn’t be the first time I was wrong, and most certainly won’t be the last.
 
Ive asked him about this matter, and hopefully will have a reply for you soon.

I cant speak to the validity of his experience and claims in regards to them
Im not him, and i wasnt there.

But for what its worth, in my dealings with him both public and in private, i do not get the sense hes hoaxing the field of ufology.

I too reserve the right to be wrong, but i just dont get the sense he would do such a nasty thing.
He and his wife have reached out to others struggling to make sense of their own experiences in this enigmatic genre. He's kept certain aspects of his experience strictly private, so's to serve as a litmus test when dealing with others who claim to have had the same experience.

We also have the Dr Leir aspect

Dr. Leir and his surgical team, have performed 11 surgeries on alleged alien abductees, resulting in the removal of twelve separate and distinct objects suspected of being [alien implants]. These objects have been scientifically investigated by some of the most prestigious laboratories in the world including Los Alamos National Labs, New Mexico Tech, and the University of California at San Diego. Their findings have been baffling and some comparisons have been made to Meteorite Samples. In addition, some of the tests show isotopic ratios not of this world.
Click to expand...


Again i cant comment on the validity of Dr Leir claims, but the case is clearly a complex one, and the first rule of telling lies is to avoid complexity and keep the lie simple.
The more detail, the greater the risk of exposure.

Do i agree with every pov expressed by Whitley ?, no.

Over the years ive oft remarked to my self he has more questions than answers, is happy to poke into any nook and cranny in trying to find them.
But to me thats entirely consistant with the genre itself.
He strikes me as more inclined to explore a hundred different possible answers, than he is to settle on a set of facts and insist he has "the answer".

I cant tell you if he was abducted by aliens or not, the honest answer to that question is i dont know.

But i would be very surprised to learn he's been so mean as to perpetrate such a hoax, on those very people he has encouraged to come to him and Anne and share their own experiences with.

Proof of his experiences would be great, but proof is a funny thing, and it also applies to the adage innocent until proven guilty.

Ive seen nothing that proves he's guilty of hoaxing his story.

So personally until i get proof one way or the other, i prefer to keep an open mind, and give him the benefit of the doubt
 
I didnt intend to question every word he as said about what he claims to have gone through. I just thought discussing the fact he seems to have experienced, in his opinion, nearly every paranormal situation one can find them self in was a bit suspicious imo.
Not to mention the way he goes about interjecting his accounts in the interviews he has done.

I can get onboard with him being abducted, thats fine with me. Most people in this area of research seem to be drawn to it searching for answers after having something unexplainable happen to them.
But with that said is it possible he has embellished somewhat? of course.

Perhaps I am applying my own perception of linear story telling or testimony.
I have had a few unexplainable things happen to me, and if I found myself on a radio program once let alone several times I believe I would recount my tale in a matter of fact way. First this happened then that followed by this a few months or years later and so on.

Maybe he gets his timing confused or forgets some of the things that have happened to him until someone else mentions it.
I cannot claim to know what is going on in his head, but I do know whats happening in mine when I listen to him speak.
I mean no disrespect to Mr. Stieber but I do believe this sort of thing comes with the territory.
 
mike said:
I've been in contact with one lady who was at the cabin and does corroborate his story. I believe she is sincere and honest both in her relating the incident at the cabin, and her own experiences. I was on the fence about this case for a long time, but ive had direct communication with Mr Streiber and this lady, and i am satisfied they would not perpetrate a hoax.
Click to expand...
FWIW: I was up in New Paltz the 3rd wkend of Sept 1979 and had a multiple object sighting w/ five other people. Eight years later, I found out this was the same night Streiber claimed he had the knocking go around his cabin that was just a few miles away from where we had our sighting... coincidence? I don't know...
 
A number of years ago my wife and I were at a party and had the occasion to meet Director Philippe Mora, who of course directed Communion. We were discussing the abduction phenomena and I asked for his take on Whitley. Well, the discussion flowed to the movie and as Philippe told me, Whitley was shall we say, somewhat of a trial to have around the set. He was a trial to the point that Philippe had to ban him from the set. Just saying ....

Decker
 
Interesting inside scoop Don, thanks.

My take on that though, would be if i had had the experiences described, and was seeing it translated to screen, i would be a real pain on set too.
In the larger picture Both Mr Mora and Streiber are directors, each with their own sense of how the product should look.
One has the accuracy of the experience in mind, the other the practicalitys of the business in mind, one has obligations to seeing their experience reproduced faithfully, the other has obligations to his investors and the need to create a product that will do well at the box office.

There is usually a trade off when translating between mediums, how often have we been disapointed to see a movie based on a book we loved.
I mentioned David Brins the postman the other day, good movie, but it didnt quite capture the sense of environmental immersion the book conveyed.

I'm not surprised there was conflict given the subject and people involved
 
Don's story inspired me to go on IMDB's page for the Communion movie and I found this little anecdote that I thought was pretty funny:

While serving as executive producer, author Whitley Strieber, whose experiences serve as the basis of the film, expressed concerns about Christopher Walken's abilities in portraying him. When Strieber finally told Walken that he might be portraying him as a little too crazy, Walken replied, "If the shoe fits."

I don't agree that Whitley is crazy but I can see how Walken would come to that conclusion, given the source material and Don's story about him getting booted from the set.
 
Muadib said:
When Strieber finally told Walken that he might be portraying him as a little too crazy, Walken replied, "If the shoe fits."
Click to expand...

I think you have to imagine Walken actually saying it using his patented voice and gestures to really get the full effect. I don't usually like humor that's at the expense of someone's character, but sometimes it's funny anyway. I wonder what Streiber's reaction was.


 
Back
Top