• 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!

Who is the biggest fanatic?

Who is the biggest fanatic of them all?

  • The skeptical debunker

    Votes: 5 31.3%
  • The religious believer

    Votes: 9 56.3%
  • The paranormal/UFO believer

    Votes: 2 12.5%
  • The conspiracist

    Votes: 7 43.8%

  • Total voters
    16

Free episodes:

Not off topic at all, as it is that indomitable conviction that we hold that defines who we are. Sometimes you get a Tesla out of this and other times you get someone on a streetcorner on a box with a megaphone. Can we separate one from the other? One man's god is another's trash heap. It is in the spirit of conviction that destabilizes that i ask the question and what is the impact of those on their own fields, and how do those looking in from the outside perceive the whole of the field as a result?

I hung out a little in skeptical circles for a while and i just could not deal with the constant mockery, as manxman points out above. Now i personally thing that the skeptic has a critical role to play and i just wish they would do it without rubbing people's nose in it, especially when we are talking about fields mostly concerned with the intangible. Should we get that excited about that, about possible trace evidence? crop circles? Well, then people get really excited about god so…

Here's a link to the first forty pages of that book: The Little Girl who was Too Fond of Matches: A Novel - Gaétan Soucy - Google Books

I think you would very much like me to read this book! :-) Whenever I see someone's heart is in a book or a movie or a piece of music, I make effort to see what is in it!
 
i feel bad because fecked up, and i stopped any attempt at being nice when i thought you were selling us short, i care about the integrity of UFO discussion, i despise the way the sides have become entrenched, and we in the middle have to sift excrement from both sides to get any sense out of the subject, i dont apologise for caring, i do deeply apologise for the hounding ive put you thru totally unnecessarily tho.
Look, i also have certain feelings about the UFO, certainly moreso that rare object than any other paranormal experience. Maybe cause i saw one, i'm not sure; in fact i'm not quite sure if i can accurately verify where the things i saw came from - in fact i know i can't. So when it comes to UFO's and their history on this planet i tend to be very critical. I've been up and down the field and have some very specific historical commentators that i enjoy, value and even believe, but i am very critical of most other things that i read.

And if you read what i post on the subject you will know that i have a very nuanced and mostly uncertain, or Zetetic position on the whole thing. It's the one thing i would most like to be true - even more than werewolves, but if you see me being skeptical about Ingo seeing aliens on the moon or certain Turkish videos of actual aliens walking about on the deck of their space ship then know i do it with my own reason and critical conviction, as i do with almost all cases. I am not arbitrary about anything unless i'm making a joke. I tend to speak with conviction, curiosity, concern and doubt. I think that if there are in fact cases that prove that something operating in our skies comes from off world, or other dimensions, or some other possible physical location in the universe, then we should be as critical as possible about such cases and put them through the ringer four or fifteen times as it's a pretty big deal if true.

And i wish that by now ufology had been given the serious chance to properly investigate such notions in a sustained manner instead of being mocked and hampered all the time. So in fact i share a lot of similar views as yourself on the subject, i just come from a very specific, disenchanted position on it as so many of the good cases/good photos in fact have been debunked. That's an issue for more than just doubt to content with, hence the many great threads on this forum investigating those very questions.
 
I think you would very much like me to read this book! :) Whenever I see someone's heart is in a book or a movie or a piece of music, I make effort to see what is in it!
"To know my library is to know me." i'm sure someone smarter than me said that a long time ago, but it's true.
 
Look, i also have certain feelings about the UFO, certainly moreso that rare object than any other paranormal experience. Maybe cause i saw one, i'm not sure; in fact i'm not quite sure if i can accurately verify where the things i saw came from - in fact i know i can't. So when it comes to UFO's and their history on this planet i tend to be very critical. I've been up and down the field and have some very specific historical commentators that i enjoy, value and even believe, but i am very critical of most other things that i read.

And if you read what i post on the subject you will know that i have a very nuanced and mostly uncertain, or Zetetic position on the whole thing. It's the one thing i would most like to be true - even more than werewolves, but if you see me being skeptical about Ingo seeing aliens on the moon or certain Turkish videos of actual aliens walking about on the deck of their space ship then know i do it with my own reason and critical conviction, as i do with almost all cases. I am not arbitrary about anything unless i'm making a joke. I tend to speak with conviction, curiosity, concern and doubt. I think that if there are in fact cases that prove that something operating in our skies comes from off world, or other dimensions, or some other possible physical location in the universe, then we should be as critical as possible about such cases and put them through the ringer four or fifteen times as it's a pretty big deal if true.

And i wish that by now ufology had been given the serious chance to properly investigate such notions in a sustained manner instead of being mocked and hampered all the time. So in fact i share a lot of similar views as yourself on the subject, i just come from a very specific, disenchanted position on it as so many of the good cases/good photos in fact have been debunked. That's an issue for more than just doubt to content with, hence the many great threads on this forum investigating those very questions.

its the number 1 isnt it, the biggest question bar none, ''are we alone'', i dont think im ever going to find the answer to the big Q on a forum, and i know i will die not knowing, but IF all the facts of a case/s could be discussed without bias, and with integrity, it would make the job of running occams razor over a lifetimes reading, and being very confident your dieing belief is correct.

i think skeptics do it for the money and/or out of fear, if we were visited, all science is up in the air, coz they broke several laws of physics to do it, everything is backup for grabs, world views, and self worths destroyed.
 
What i'm curious about is which field is most likely to produce that individual overridden by emotion who is most likely to step into the centre of the crowd and yell, "Burn the witch!!" That really takes a special kind of person and a special kind of belief system to move towards fanaticism.

That's a very good question and I've never examined the subject from quite that angle. I would tend to fall back on the old fuzzy division of people into those camps who innately wish to control the behavior of others and those who don't. But these are broad categories indeed.
 
I really want to reject the whole "us vs. them" mindset. The UFO/Paranormal/Supernatural subject has historically been plagued by charlatans, fantasists, and the delusional. It is a historical FACT that cannot be denied except by the fanatical and delusional themselves.

Where does that leave the UFO buff, the paranormal enthusiast, the supernatural/spiritual seeker? If they're smart, if they're concerned about the "the truth" of the matter, if they don't want to be taken, they will be skeptical of any UFO, Paranormal, Political or Supernatural/Spiritual claim that is presented to them. If they aren't, they're damn fools, and will be led by the nose down the path by someone who isn't interested in truth as much as something else they think they can extract from them. Sometimes it is money, often it's just attention, acknowledgement, or simply validation.

I've been into this since I was a small child. I've passed through every belief, disbelief, unbelief stage that you can with these topics. I've been taken, been convinced of things that were not true, convinced others of these things, and frightened myself and probably several small children (I was a Sunday School teacher) along the way.

What am I now? I believe people experience strange things and sometimes think inappropriate things about them. I believe one of the central "truths" of these subjects is as Vallee said, "Not only is there an amazing willingness in the human mind to invest credence and faith in unproven facts, but there is more evil, more readiness than ever on the part of various sophisticated groups, to use this human weakness as a tool in controlling others."

Does it make me a debunker when I point out the fallacy of someone posting a picture of a Saturn second stage and calling it a UFO? Am I a die-hard skeptic because I don't believe the spirits of the dead and aliens roam the Earth? Am I a heartless atheist when I point out that your personal god/God/goddess is just one of the 3000 or so that mankind has worshiped during its short time on Earth? Or am I just another credulous sap who has burned his hand on the stove enough times now?

I suspend my disbelief and throw a lot of ideas in the air in this forum from time to time and make pronouncements that might make it appear that I think I know what I'm talking about. Hopefully, folks who have read more than a couple of my posts realize that is what I'm doing.

Do I believe that some Unidentified Flying Objects are real manufactured vehicles of some sort that are outside of the general public's knowledge? Yes I do. Are they manufactured and operated by something other than human beings? I do not know, nor do I know of any way to reliably tell.

All that said, I do believe that the universe is not bound by the confines of human experience and that strange things exist that neither our senses or our minds can comprehend in any real sense. I believe the best way to safely navigate this universe is through the use of science and not fanatical or religious belief although I have been guilty of both and I know I am entirely too gullible for my own good.
 
Last edited:
I really want to reject the whole "us vs. them" mindset. The UFO/Paranormal/Supernatural subject has historically been plagued by charlatans, fantasists, and the delusional. It is a historical FACT that cannot be denied except by the fanatical and delusional themselves.

Where does that leave the UFO buff, the paranormal enthusiast, the supernatural/spiritual seeker? If they're smart, if they're concerned about the "the truth" of the matter, if they don't want to be taken, they will be skeptical of any UFO, Paranormal, Political or Supernatural/Spiritual claim that is presented to them. If they aren't, they're damn fools, and will be led by the nose down the path by someone who isn't interested in truth as much as something else they think they can extract from them. Sometimes it is money, often it's just attention, acknowledgement, or simply validation.

I've been into this since I was a small child. I've passed through every belief, disbelief, unbelief stage that you can with these topics. I've been taken, been convinced of things that were not true, convinced others of these things, and frightened myself and probably several small children (I was a Sunday School teacher) along the way.

What am I now? I believe people experience strange things and sometimes think inappropriate things about them. I believe one of the central "truths" of these subjects is as Vallee said, "Not only is there an amazing willingness in the human mind to invest credence and faith in unproven facts, but there is more evil, more readiness than ever on the part of various sophisticated groups, to use this human weakness as a tool in controlling others."

Does it make me a debunker when I point out the fallacy of someone posting a picture of a Saturn second stage and calling it a UFO? Am I a die-hard skeptic because I don't believe the spirits of the dead and aliens roam the Earth? Am I a heartless atheist when I point out that your personal god/God/goddess is just one of the 3000 or so that mankind has worshiped during its short time on Earth? Or am I just another credulous sap who has burned his hand on the stove enough times now?

I suspend my disbelief and throw a lot of ideas in the air in this forum from time to time and make pronouncements that might make appear that I think I know what I'm talking about. Hopefully, folks who have read more than a couple of my posts realize that is what I'm doing.

Do I believe that some Unidentified Flying Objects are real manufactured vehicles of some sort that are outside of the general public's knowledge? Yes I do. Are they manufactured and operated by something other than human beings? I do not know, nor do I know of any way to reliably tell.

All that said, I do believe that the universe is not bound by the confines of human experience and that strange things exist that neither our senses or our minds can comprehend in any real sense. I believe the best way to safely navigate this universe is through the use of science and not fanatical or religious belief although I have been guilty of both and I know I am entirely too gullible for my own good.

I really want to reject the whole "us vs. them" mindset. I agree - I think that at one time or another, we've, between all of us, been all of those others - so there is only us.

I have been guilty of both and I know I am entirely too gullible for my own good. It seems your awareness of your gullibility now serves you well? I don't know any other path to wisdom.

Does it make me a debunker when I point out the fallacy of someone posting a picture of a Saturn second stage and calling it a UFO? Am I a die-hard skeptic because I don't believe the spirits of the dead and aliens roam the Earth? Am I a heartless atheist when I point out that your personal god/God/goddess is just one of the 3000 or so that mankind has worshiped during its short time on Earth? Or am I just another credulous sap who has burned his hand on the stove enough times now?

So much of it is in how that's said . . . is it the right time, is it true, is it spoken gently and with kindness and is it profitable?

I believe the best way to safely navigate this universe is through the use of science and not fanatical or religious belief . . . but we still have to make moral and aesthetic judgments (and discern the difference in the two).
 
...So much of it is in how that's said . . . is it the right time, is it true, is it spoken gently and with kindness and is it profitable?...
I believe the best way to safely navigate this universe is through the use of science and not fanatical or religious belief . . . but we still have to make moral and aesthetic judgments (and discern the difference in the two).

Yes, empathy breeds patience and understanding. However, in the face of unyielding fanaticism, fundamentalism, and willful ignorance it is often hard to speak gently, offer kindness, and look for the win-win. In my experience, fanatical or religious belief divorced from the guiding hand of rationality and science is neither moral or beautiful and produces more suffering than healing balm.
 
Yes, empathy breeds patience and understanding. However, in the face of unyielding fanaticism, fundamentalism, and willful ignorance it is often hard to speak gently, offer kindness, and look for the win-win. In my experience, fanatical or religious belief divorced from the guiding hand of rationality and science is neither moral or beautiful and produces more suffering than healing balm.

Agreed - the time for those approaches is before someone hardens into the above states - if and when they are open. The ideal of a warm heart in the service of a cool head is what I meant to convey.
 
Yes, empathy breeds patience and understanding. However, in the face of unyielding fanaticism, fundamentalism, and willful ignorance it is often hard to speak gently, offer kindness, and look for the win-win. In my experience, fanatical or religious belief divorced from the guiding hand of rationality and science is neither moral or beautiful and produces more suffering than healing balm.

In my experience, fanatical or religious belief divorced from the guiding hand of rationality and science is neither moral or beautiful and produces more suffering than healing balm.

My point here is that science can't tell us what is good or what is beautiful.
 
Marvin_the_Martian_by_Venarin.png
but this is a forum and we should try not to let emotion get into our discussions, though we are all guilty of that, well everyone except smcder because he has superhuman patience.

so all i can say is that there are always lessons. the one i often have to learn the most is to look before i leap and so it goes. i try to think about my betters around here whenever i feel like i'm losing it and think about what they would do and respond in kind. be well and be considerate of others. i'm still working on that one myself.

well everyone except smcder because he has superhuman patience.

I just try every day to become the person my dog thinks I am . . . ;-)
 
In my experience, fanatical or religious belief divorced from the guiding hand of rationality and science is neither moral or beautiful and produces more suffering than healing balm.

My point here is that science can't tell us what is good or what is beautiful.

Well, actually, it can and often does. Not only can "science" tell you what is good (whether something has beneficial qualities) , but science can also tell you what is perceived as beautiful by humans and why. But I get what you mean.
 
Well, actually, it can and often does. Not only can "science" tell you what is good (whether something has beneficial qualities) , but science can also tell you what is perceived as beautiful by humans and why. But I get what you mean.

In the examples above, you would still have to define "beneficial qualities" and "beautiful" before science can come in to play.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
well i'm certainly working on keeping my faith in humanity's ability to reason at the moment.

but you know, i do feel bad about the religious folk - as they were openly mocked on a high order, and i wonder about that as a position on its own. but i guess when you see things one way, others are not just impossible, perhaps the skeptic feels entirely uncomfortable with such thoughts, like their very being is threatened? whenever a person has conviction over something and it is debunked it's not pretty; its equally impossible a feeling i suppose.

My guess is that the biggest religion represented on the forum is Scientism . . . maybe closely followed by Wikipediaism . . . ;-)
 
well everyone except smcder because he has superhuman patience.

I just try every day to become the person my dog thinks I am . . . ;-)
My dog still loves me but keeps hoping, with supreme patience, that one day I will become the person he pretends I am. He's a good dog.
 
In my experience, fanatical or religious belief divorced from the guiding hand of rationality and science is neither moral or beautiful and produces more suffering than healing balm.

My point here is that science can't tell us what is good or what is beautiful.
And yet I know no more passionate person than the scientist fully and completely in love with the shape, texture, colour, design, sound & movement of that which they study. Be it dung beetle or beaver homes, the scientist sees a scintillating beauty in the form and manner of their subject. And they see a goodness of purpose of role in that which moves them.
 
And yet I know no more passionate person than the scientist fully and completely in love with the shape, texture, colour, design, sound & movement of that which they study. Be it dung beetle or beaver homes, the scientist sees a scintillating beauty in the form and manner of their subject. And they see a goodness of purpose of role in that which moves them.

I agree - scientists can be no more (and no less) passionate than artists, lovers, mystics, philosophers . . .

Science is a set of methods for organizing knowledge in a form that can lead to testable explanations and predictions about the universe and as such it cannot tell us what is good and what is beautiful until we define those terms.
 
And yet I know no more passionate person than the scientist fully and completely in love with the shape, texture, colour, design, sound & movement of that which they study. Be it dung beetle or beaver homes, the scientist sees a scintillating beauty in the form and manner of their subject. And they see a goodness of purpose of role in that which moves them.

And yet I know no more passionate person than the scientist fully and completely in love with the shape, texture, colour, design, sound & movement of that which they study. Be it dung beetle or beaver homes, the scientist sees a scintillating beauty in the form and manner of their subject.

Do you see a scintillating beauty in the form and manner of the dung beetle? Does any scientist see beauty in the form and manner of the dung beetle and beaver homes? Do you think, for example, Stephen Hawking does?
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top