Author Linda Moulton Howe  (Read 119906 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #420 on: August 03, 2012, 06:51:27 PM »
I should just spend that time with my balls in a vice......or get 12 consecutive prostate exams.  :)

Hey, whatever floats your boat.  I ain't gonna judge ya.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #421 on: August 06, 2012, 03:13:26 AM »
I have not listened to her regularly. But I listen to people for a living. These are my observations. These are not spontaneous interviews. Her droning  way of speaking suggests she is reading directly. You know how when somebody is reading something aloud and they are not a very good reader, with showing emotions and dramatic pauses and such? They'll read robotically like she does. What was interesting was the seismologist also talked this way suggesting they both read from a script.  What's interesting is after her interview with him she comes on live withh GN over a phone..and if you listen you'll notice that she says 'uhh' a lot when not reading a script.

I guess what I'm saying is from listening to her taped interview, and then her talking semi off the cuff with Nory I suddenly realize she must be an incredible perfectionist that she rehearses these interviews on tape so much. They almost sound like a female Steven Hawkins speaking. She has longer than natural pauses in between words as she tries to enunciate each word perfectly.

It's  a very wooden way of speaking she has perfected in her interview style. I'm guessing somebody pointed out her 'uhhh' to her a long time ago and this is her way of correcting/overcompensating for  it.

All I could think about after listening to this was how long does it take her to interview somebody, when she obviously per-interviews and then scripts an entire interview back and forth? It must take her days.

Other professional interviewers rehearse, but not word for word like she does.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #422 on: August 06, 2012, 10:41:16 AM »
I have not listened to her regularly. But I listen to people for a living. These are my observations. These are not spontaneous interviews. Her droning  way of speaking suggests she is reading directly. You know how when somebody is reading something aloud and they are not a very good reader, with showing emotions and dramatic pauses and such? They'll read robotically like she does. What was interesting was the seismologist also talked this way suggesting they both read from a script.  What's interesting is after her interview with him she comes on live withh GN over a phone..and if you listen you'll notice that she says 'uhh' a lot when not reading a script.

I guess what I'm saying is from listening to her taped interview, and then her talking semi off the cuff with Nory I suddenly realize she must be an incredible perfectionist that she rehearses these interviews on tape so much. They almost sound like a female Steven Hawkins speaking. She has longer than natural pauses in between words as she tries to enunciate each word perfectly.

It's  a very wooden way of speaking she has perfected in her interview style. I'm guessing somebody pointed out her 'uhhh' to her a long time ago and this is her way of correcting/overcompensating for  it.

All I could think about after listening to this was how long does it take her to interview somebody, when she obviously per-interviews and then scripts an entire interview back and forth? It must take her days.

Other professional interviewers rehearse, but not word for word like she does.

I agree absolutely. Her background was as a serious tv reporter/producer, and she didn't move into paranormal/alt stuff until well into the 80's. I think it's not an oversight, and that she has intentionally chosen this sort of "professional" style to demonstrate that it's a worthy field of endeavor.

Also, in the last several years she has developed what sounds to me very much like an incipient Parkinson's vocal quaver. It's not as noticeable as , say, Katharine Hepburn's famous warble, and I'm not saying it's necessarily Parkinson's; but there's something going on that makes her voice noticeably shaky at her relatively young age. IIRC, unless there's some sort of trauma or disease, the shaky voice doesn't usually appear, if at all, until extreme old age - at least well into one's 80's or even 90's. But she's definitely got the beginnings of a "little old lady voice". 


Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #423 on: August 06, 2012, 12:14:33 PM »
I agree absolutely. Her background was as a serious tv reporter/producer, and she didn't move into paranormal/alt stuff until well into the 80's. I think it's not an oversight, and that she has intentionally chosen this sort of "professional" style to demonstrate that it's a worthy field of endeavor.

Also, in the last several years she has developed what sounds to me very much like an incipient Parkinson's vocal quaver. It's not as noticeable as , say, Katharine Hepburn's famous warble, and I'm not saying it's necessarily Parkinson's; but there's something going on that makes her voice noticeably shaky at her relatively young age. IIRC, unless there's some sort of trauma or disease, the shaky voice doesn't usually appear, if at all, until extreme old age - at least well into one's 80's or even 90's. But she's definitely got the beginnings of a "little old lady voice".

Agreed with all the above, and the post above this.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #424 on: August 06, 2012, 06:52:40 PM »
She is still one of my favorite guests, and although I don't always agree with her findings, at least she does some actual reporting.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #425 on: August 06, 2012, 06:58:35 PM »
I just love the fact that her hatred for george is so palatable... I'd totally pay good money to see her beat his ass in a ring somewhere... and i think she totally wants to as well.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #426 on: August 06, 2012, 07:05:45 PM »
I just love the fact that her hatred for george is so palatable... I'd totally pay good money to see her beat his ass in a ring somewhere... and i think she totally wants to as well.

*like*

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #427 on: August 06, 2012, 08:02:34 PM »
You know everybody has their quirks. I have to say I'm impressed with the amount of passion, determination she is trumpeting in her interview segments.  You, or I may not believe what she's talking about, but I strongly feel she believes it. Not to distract anybody from her message, but the next time she plays one of her long winded interview tapes note that she hardly seemsto show any emotion in her sentences, yet the words she often uses are very impassioned. This makes it so striking for me to listen to her because she clearly meant to evoke passion and then says the words without any. The only time she ever breaks from this I noticed is when saying the last word of a question. But I don't think it mean any emotion..it's her opening her eyes wider, giving a little lift to her voice..to signal to the interviewee it's their turn to read.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #428 on: August 07, 2012, 07:26:46 PM »
As I understand it, when Linda worked for major media, she was a producer, not an on-air personality.  Producers frequently do the actual interviewing, bring the tape back, then the on-air person tapes the questions.  Sometimes the producer does the pre-interview.

Why are some good reporters producers rather than on-air?  Because their interviewing style is so dull and unemotional.  I think she falls into this category.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #429 on: August 07, 2012, 08:06:53 PM »
As I understand it, when Linda worked for major media, she was a producer, not an on-air personality.  Producers frequently do the actual interviewing, bring the tape back, then the on-air person tapes the questions.  Sometimes the producer does the pre-interview.

Why are some good reporters producers rather than on-air?  Because their interviewing style is so dull and unemotional.  I think she falls into this category.

I believe Linda Howe was on camera from some documentaries on her cattle mutiliation investigations in the late 70s.
Of course she has appeared on camera for years on older TV programs like Sightings, Encounters (Fox TV)  and newer shows like Ancient Aliens too.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #430 on: August 09, 2012, 03:16:25 PM »
Mid 1990s LMH per the youtube description (video says '05, that can't be right):


Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #431 on: August 09, 2012, 03:55:25 PM »
open letter to LMH  ... bullshit UFO sightings and ridiculous crop circles aren't that important. 

regards,

b_dubb

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #432 on: August 11, 2012, 06:15:39 PM »
....ridiculous crop circles....

Speaking of which, I'd like a definitive answer, with significant credible evidence. There have been gobs of what seemed to be incredibly complex patterns that turn out to be hoaxed. But I am under the impression there are some events which are almost incontrovertible, in which trustworthy investigators visit an untouched field, leave, and then see orbs or some such activity, and return a few moments later to find a complex design impressed into the crop. Are there such examples?

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #433 on: August 11, 2012, 06:33:03 PM »
Speaking of which, I'd like a definitive answer, with significant credible evidence. There have been gobs of what seemed to be incredibly complex patterns that turn out to be hoaxed. But I am under the impression there are some events which are almost incontrovertible, in which trustworthy investigators visit an untouched field, leave, and then see orbs or some such activity, and return a few moments later to find a complex design impressed into the crop. Are there such examples?

My understanding is possibly no/yes.  :D

To clarify:  This is a lot like UFOs.  For those cases where objective people who really have no pre-conceived notion investigate, mundane explanations are almost always found, or the evidence that people supply to show it's a paranormal event is shown to be fake, inconclusive, or also mundane.

But, there are always a few cases that cannot be explained.

The null hypothesis is that these are mundane events that are hoaxed.  The burden of proof/evidence is on the people making the paranormal claim.  When some of their best cases turn out to be faked, then there comes a point where one must ask, "Even with those few cases that can't be explained, what's the most likely scenario?  That these, which aren't the best cases, are really evidence of the paranormal claim, or that we just don't have enough evidence to show them to be hoaxed?"

My default is the latter.  LMH's is the former.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #434 on: October 27, 2014, 05:51:41 PM »
All I know is that I like LMH but she was really good on the recent Dark Weekend show (or, I guess, now called Dark City) about Ebola. Unlike the more recent C2C over the past years it is an actual interview and questions for much of the time and not pre-recorded playing of cassette taped interviews with other people- though I don't mind those.)

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #435 on: October 27, 2014, 06:02:56 PM »
LMH is not in the business to earn a Pulitzer, she's in it to put groceries on the table.  She has her shtick and C2C, among others, pays her for it.  No foul.  As Noory guests go, she's solidly in the upper 50 percentile.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #436 on: October 27, 2014, 06:15:40 PM »
All I know is that I like LMH but she was really good on the recent Dark Weekend show (or, I guess, now called Dark City) about Ebola. Unlike the more recent C2C over the past years it is an actual interview and questions for much of the time and not pre-recorded playing of cassette taped interviews with other people- though I don't mind those.)

those are great when shes on coast

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #437 on: October 28, 2014, 12:11:13 AM »
those are great when shes on coast
I like her, as I mentioned, one of the few from the "old days" that hasn't become a total hack and never was a believer, in my opinion. I will, of course, say that she might not be a total "reporter" but, actually, a better one than many modern reporters because she let's people talk (including with cassette tapes and long statements by them) and dedication to subjects and let's listeners decide, but doesn't claim to not have some beliefs or theories. She was great on Dark Weekend or Dark City. And had chance to describe her opinions more. But I still had feeling that she was still searching...which is what a investigative journalist should be doing....still didn't like going to the Zichan stuff but, you know.  I still, sometimes, when hearing her about cattle mutilation just think of
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083885/
Which I also liked, though got bad reviews. But worth a good watch due to actors and plot. Have a few pops first and whilst watching though. haha.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #438 on: October 28, 2014, 01:02:33 AM »
open letter to LMH  ... bullshit UFO sightings and ridiculous crop circles aren't that important. 

regards,

b_dubb

I gave up on crop circles when I saw one that was obviously Green Lantern's insignia.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #439 on: October 28, 2014, 01:29:23 AM »
I thought the subject of the sounds people had recorded coming from underground were pretty weird. Sounded like horns or something. It Russia I think. But people had recorded similar sounds all over the world. It was good enough to entertain me as I dose off.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #440 on: October 30, 2014, 01:35:21 PM »
I gave up on crop circles when I saw one that was obviously Green Lantern's insignia.
Did the Green Lantern show up?

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #441 on: October 31, 2014, 09:10:12 AM »
I thought LMH was especially irritating last night. The content was OK -- even good, in parts -- but to hear her reading out her questions in that schoolroom voice is painful.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #442 on: October 31, 2014, 11:05:17 AM »
I thought LMH was especially irritating last night. The content was OK -- even good, in parts -- but to hear her reading out her questions in that schoolroom voice is painful.
It's clear that she recites her questions to fit better after she's edited the interview tapes.  Maybe she thinks it makes her questions sound smarter.  It doesn't.

I thought her interview of the MD working on an Ebola vaccine was very good; she made no attempt to conceal it when he corrected her incorrect assumptions.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #443 on: October 31, 2014, 02:55:01 PM »
I generally trust LMH's reporting (not necessarily the people she's interviewing) more than just about anyone else on C2C, but I have one request.  Could she please stop using the phrase 'the planet' every chance she gets?  It's irritating when George has to get it in every segment he does, and her constant use, in his mind, can only validate him.  In fact, he probably started saying it because he heard her use it all the time.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #444 on: March 09, 2015, 01:33:04 AM »
I am convinced that one big foot sound Art plays all the time is Linda howling into one of those children's echo microphone toys and recording it. Guess she was sending the mating signal out.

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #445 on: March 09, 2015, 07:09:32 AM »
Published Feb-20-2015:


Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #446 on: March 09, 2015, 10:04:42 AM »
Published Feb-20-2015:



I have saved 4 LMH monthly interviews on my iPod...  When I'm dealing with insomnia, I will listen to one of them..  Seriously, I'm normally asleep within 15 minutes after that..  Don't know if it's her voice, or delivery, but it puts me to sleep ASAP!

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #447 on: March 09, 2015, 11:04:52 AM »
I really wish I could listen to her.  She's interviewed some solid people and isn't nearly as prone to conspiracy as George Noory.  She even stood up to him about the H1N1 a few years ago.

But I just can't. She drones.  It's just unlistenable, which is sad.  :-\

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #448 on: March 09, 2015, 12:39:12 PM »
The people she interviews sound like they're reading a script. No umms, ahhhs etc

Re: Linda Moulton Howe
« Reply #449 on: March 27, 2015, 08:10:43 AM »
I have not listened to her regularly. But I listen to people for a living. These are my observations. These are not spontaneous interviews. Her droning  way of speaking suggests she is reading directly. You know how when somebody is reading something aloud and they are not a very good reader, with showing emotions and dramatic pauses and such? They'll read robotically like she does. What was interesting was the seismologist also talked this way suggesting they both read from a script.  What's interesting is after her interview with him she comes on live withh GN over a phone..and if you listen you'll notice that she says 'uhh' a lot when not reading a script.

I guess what I'm saying is from listening to her taped interview, and then her talking semi off the cuff with Nory I suddenly realize she must be an incredible perfectionist that she rehearses these interviews on tape so much. They almost sound like a female Steven Hawkins speaking. She has longer than natural pauses in between words as she tries to enunciate each word perfectly.

It's  a very wooden way of speaking she has perfected in her interview style. I'm guessing somebody pointed out her 'uhhh' to her a long time ago and this is her way of correcting/overcompensating for  it.

All I could think about after listening to this was how long does it take her to interview somebody, when she obviously per-interviews and then scripts an entire interview back and forth? It must take her days.

Other professional interviewers rehearse, but not word for word like she does.
Yes, yes, yes.  I was thinking robotic, as well.  And the slow and deliberate pronunciation of each word, very carefully, the way a child would.
Whenever she's on I don't listen.  She is inclined to long descriptive sentences that just drone on.  The speech pattern seems to evoke, in my mind, that of a person that has been in some sort of mental trauma. 
There is usually a sort of flow to words strung together that evades her. 

Thank you for your astute critique on Ms.Howe's speech.  I just cannot listen to her.