Author Richard Syrett  (Read 123246 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #90 on: April 14, 2014, 10:57:51 AM »
I'd like to have heard the second half last night, but couldn't make it through the Quack Of The Month. Five seconds on Rappaport's website shows he's a multi-tasking huckster.  PRN has to be selling show bookings to the scam artists; they're almost always on a split show with the interesting subject held hostage until listeners endure a two hour infomercial.  In the old days, a topic like the Shroud of Turin would get a whole show...and would hold the audience.


I took a nap during the first half. I must say, I found the second half very enjoyable. Dr. Silverman has done considerable research on the Shroud.

I have been fascinated by the Shroud for many years, so naturally, I find any intelligent discussion of it to be quite interesting. Syrett asked great critical questions as well. You can tell he REALLY did his research.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #91 on: April 14, 2014, 11:19:11 AM »
FYI here's quackwatch on Stan Burzynski, championed last nihgt.

http://www.casewatch.org/board/med/burzynski/complaint_2010.shtml

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #92 on: April 14, 2014, 11:22:00 AM »
FYI here's quackwatch on Stan Burzynski, championed last nihgt.

http://www.casewatch.org/board/med/burzynski/complaint_2010.shtml


Not surprising at all.


Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #93 on: April 14, 2014, 12:22:47 PM »
 :(
I only listen to Coast on Sunday if George Knapp is hosting...
Memo to Premiere: enough with the cavalcade of nobodies. Pick a weekend host and go with them.
I'm surprised Knapp is still with C2C.  Talk about a voice in the wilderness.  As for "The Others," even PremRat is apparently having a hard time finding a weekend host who  meets or exceeds the supreme suckage of Jorch.  I'm surprised Seagul or whatever the hell is name is hasn't made a roaring comeback.  ::)

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #94 on: April 14, 2014, 12:35:22 PM »

I took a nap during the first half. I must say, I found the second half very enjoyable. Dr. Silverman has done considerable research on the Shroud.

I have been fascinated by the Shroud for many years, so naturally, I find any intelligent discussion of it to be quite interesting. Syrett asked great critical questions as well. You can tell he REALLY did his research.


Agreed!

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #95 on: April 14, 2014, 04:03:47 PM »
First guy was the typical quack-fraud that has infested this program in recent years.

Whatever. You fight the power, brother... and keep those cash registers dancing.

Second segment was awesome. As others mentioned, I have new respect for Syrett--he did a great job. I shudder to imagine the idiotic questions we'd have to endure if Dr. Silverman were forced to contend with Noory.

I personally think the Shroud is the real deal. A Hungarian particle physicist and artist named Isabel Piczek likewise pointed out the image on the Shroud is distortion free, which means yeah, the body wasn't lying flat, rather it was hovering between the two halves of linen... like it was zero gravity in that tomb.

It's an event horizon, like a black hole... or even a Big Bang. Revelation 13:8 does say the Lamb (Jesus) was slain before the foundation of the world or universe (kosmos in Greek). I take it it the resurrection also occurred beforehand as well since He didn't stick around in the tomb.

Did this already happen somewhere outside of time before this universe was created?






 

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #96 on: April 15, 2014, 01:04:57 AM »
You know Tommy, your mention of an 'event horizon'/black hole type phenomenon is the second mention I have come across for the Shroud of Turin.  I didn't listen to the second half of the show.  Was this wording in the dialogue?

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #97 on: April 15, 2014, 07:26:18 AM »
I didn't specifically hear "event horizon", though I think the guest (or Syrett himself) did mention that, somehow, the laws of physics did NOT apply in that tomb as per evidence on the body and cloth.

I listened while at work where I'm usually quite busy stocking, washing dishes, etc. so it's possible I missed it if he did.





Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #98 on: April 15, 2014, 07:27:12 PM »
I need to go back to that show and replay when I can allow myself to listen to all of it.  But I get the impression that Syrett is very right wing, which makes me a little nervous after JBW...  Is everyone on the radio from the right now?  Where's the balance?  Surely we don't have to listen to a moonbat in order to get some balance?  Other than that, he seems ok, much better than igsnoory...

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #99 on: April 16, 2014, 01:54:11 PM »
I need to go back to that show and replay when I can allow myself to listen to all of it.  But I get the impression that Syrett is very right wing, which makes me a little nervous after JBW...  Is everyone on the radio from the right now?  Where's the balance?  Surely we don't have to listen to a moonbat in order to get some balance?  Other than that, he seems ok, much better than igsnoory...
I think in the final analysis, you are the balance.  Turn it off.  Of course, then I should  just turn off snoory instead of enjoying listening for mispronunciations, screwball touchy feely newage spew and counting the number of times he can work tumeric into the conversation.  "Well caller, while i ignore your question entirely, what do you think the odds are that the Boston Marathon bombing was actually due to a deficit of tumeric in the bombers diet?  And consider this, if we seeded the clouds with tumeric, would that counteract the chemtrails and the insidious creep of verbal hemorrhoids that are the hosts of C2C?"

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #100 on: April 16, 2014, 08:20:06 PM »
Ok, but it's turmeric, not tumeric.

I disagree with the idea that I am the balance...  The balance is to complain and push for change, not to withdraw and hide under a rock.  Liberals have done just that, hide under a rock and let the extreme right take over radio. 

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #101 on: April 17, 2014, 01:17:45 AM »
Ok, but it's turmeric, not tumeric.

I disagree with the idea that I am the balance...  The balance is to complain and push for change, not to withdraw and hide under a rock.  Liberals have done just that, hide under a rock and let the extreme right take over radio.
Yeah, but didn't the libs take over the country?  Wheres the balance?

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #102 on: May 03, 2014, 07:36:26 PM »
I haven't listened to Syrett yet, but this sounds like kind of a cool show tonite so I'm gonna check it out, then chime in with my unrequested but freely-given opinion later.

Robots of the Future/ Wanta Revelations
Sat 05-03
Joining host Richard Syrett in the first half, scientist, professor, and entrepreneur Steve Omohundro warns that autonomous robots of the future are likely to behave in anti-social and harmful ways unless they are very carefully designed (related paper). In the second half, biographer Marilyn Barnewall details how Reagan-era intelligence agent Leo Emil Wanta attempted to cause the financial collapse of the Soviet Union.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #103 on: May 04, 2014, 01:20:45 AM »
This Wanta segment is rather interesting.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #104 on: May 04, 2014, 01:30:20 AM »
This Wanta segment is rather interesting.

Hmm seems kinda weird, but maybe it's normal for the spy-world?  Still, I wanta hear more.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #105 on: May 04, 2014, 10:22:19 AM »
It was an interesting show ...... good guests, and an engaged host. 
Fuck you Noory ......... stay away.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #106 on: May 04, 2014, 11:00:09 AM »
I think I'm starting to like this Syrett guy. This is the second show I've tuned into where he really seemed engaging.

How about that caller who read Wanta the riot act, the guy who said he was going to "cross examine" him? I missed most of his diatribe (busy night at work) and it seems he dropped off/or was dropped after the break.

I do remember being put off by the author's typical "he sounded like a CIA disinformation agent" blather conspiracy hounds always trot out when challenged.

The "shill card" got old fast... 


Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #107 on: May 04, 2014, 11:28:27 AM »
The segment on AI was interesting.  The second segment was one of C2C lowest descents into screwball conspiracies and convoluted crankdom.  Leave this crap to the Rense and Jones crowd.  Sirette's fixation on psychotic-level nonsense will turn what's left of C2C into a joke.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #108 on: May 04, 2014, 12:20:05 PM »
The segment on AI was interesting.  The second segment was one of C2C lowest descents into screwball conspiracies and convoluted crankdom.  Leave this crap to the Rense and Jones crowd.  Sirette's fixation on psychotic-level nonsense will turn what's left of C2C into a joke.
I sincerely doubt that there has ever been $27 trillion dollars.  Anywhere.  Maybe if you combined China and the USA.  This story didn't hold water.  Not even a drop. 

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #109 on: May 04, 2014, 02:06:10 PM »
Hmm seems kinda weird, but maybe it's normal for the spy-world?  Still, I wanta hear more.

Me too........even if this was totally impossible, I was interested!  I thought Syrett did just fine last night.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #110 on: May 04, 2014, 02:37:54 PM »

 I haven't seen anything on that Flight 370 story Syrett mentioned at the start of last night's show in any reliable news source yet. Nor do I expect to.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #111 on: May 04, 2014, 03:42:21 PM »
That was a pretty cool show last nite.  I don't know what to make of any of it, but I found it all intriguing enough to stay awake through most of it.  My first time listening to Syrett, and I liked him as a host.  He had a Knapp-like clarity in his questions and was engaged in the conversations with his guests.  There's some potential here.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #112 on: May 04, 2014, 04:46:19 PM »
That was a pretty cool show last nite.  I don't know what to make of any of it, but I found it all intriguing enough to stay awake through most of it.  My first time listening to Syrett, and I liked him as a host.  He had a Knapp-like clarity in his questions and was engaged in the conversations with his guests.  There's some potential here.


I agree.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #113 on: May 04, 2014, 05:39:50 PM »
I haven't seen anything on that Flight 370 story Syrett mentioned at the start of last night's show in any reliable news source yet. Nor do I expect to.
No substance to it. I'm shocked that such a tabloid story was repeated on C2C.
http://www.straitstimes.com/news/asia/south-east-asia/story/malaysian-police-denies-british-report-suspected-militants-were-quiz

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #114 on: May 05, 2014, 01:19:29 PM »
I sincerely doubt that there has ever been $27 trillion dollars.  Anywhere.  Maybe if you combined China and the USA.  This story didn't hold water.  Not even a drop.
Yeah, the "$27 Trillion" is an astronomical number and not believable. Especially also considering this was several decades ago. Even our various banker bailouts and government give-aways recently only approach the number in the lower trillions by the various estimates. And only $2.3 trillion was 'missing' before the 911 attacks according to Rumsfeld. I think even with the new wars we haven't spend more than, at high level, $3 trillion even if we include nebulous things like future costs and opportunity costs.

But who is the guy who always get a call in and starts rambling about the "Switzerland's Righteous King" etc? How does he always get through the screener and what is his weird theory about the "real king" who can save the world and get rid of the bankers?

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #115 on: May 05, 2014, 02:20:54 PM »
Yeah, the "$27 Trillion" is an astronomical number and not believable.
...
Syrett could be a decent C2C host if he'd recognize the difference between plausible conspiracy, the implausible, and plain old cranks with paranoid delusions.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #116 on: May 05, 2014, 07:40:07 PM »
Syrett could be a decent C2C host if he'd recognize the difference between plausible conspiracy, the implausible, and plain old cranks with paranoid delusions.

People always complain about this from various hosts, that they have to be more rigorous and hard-hitting on the guests.  But c'mon the nature of the show is that they have to give alot of leeway. 

The topics are full of fringe science, wacky conspiracies, metaphysical conjecture, etc.  If hosts were super-rigid about cross-examining the guests it would just take all the fun out of it and many shows would either end up as unfomfortable confrontations or would just go nowhere at all.

Lots of these guests are probably flakes, frauds, or simply delusional, but some likely are actually legit.  My feeling for this particular kind of infotainment, is that the host just has to bring their stories and claims to light - it's up to us to make up our minds.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #117 on: May 05, 2014, 07:50:04 PM »
People always complain about this from various hosts, that they have to be more rigorous and hard-hitting on the guests.  But c'mon the nature of the show is that they have to give alot of leeway. 


Art had plenty of shows where he was as challenging as a wet paper towel as well.

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #118 on: May 05, 2014, 07:51:22 PM »
Art had plenty of shows where he was as challenging as a wet paper towel as well.

yes but art at least made them entertaining for the most part.noory just reads the next 3x5 card (i guess premier wouldnt get him a teleprompter).

Re: Richard Syrett
« Reply #119 on: May 05, 2014, 07:52:05 PM »
Art had plenty of shows where he was as challenging as a wet paper towel as well.
In all of the years he had a few maybe. This is just the tip of the iceburg we're talking about in C2C's history. Noory on the other hand sunk the fucking Titanic.