BellGab.com Archive

Now my apology post.

Usually try to keep personal crapola off boards but did mention internal life stressors on the "where are the women" thread.  Life filled with medical crises for family right now, PSU stuff just shattering to community, and my usual "good head on my shoulders" not holding as well as it usually does. 

Should have stayed away rather than ranting and raving here.  Came cause I haven't much lately and hoped to get some cheer from the delightful souls and senses of humor (and Noory hate) that usually cheers me.  But docs put me on some anti-anxiety thingies that are making me just run my mouth.

I will go back into my cave now. 

Quote from: b_dubb on July 27, 2012, 06:11:47 AM

Penn State makes me sick

No you don't, b_dubb.  You hate what the media has told you to hate about Penn State.  You don't know or understand the real Penn State.

And I say this knowing you are in my "Favorite Posters" list, so I don't want it to sound mean or nasty or hateful.  But if you hate Penn State, you hate me.  I don't want to put too much out on the internet, but I was there for nearly 3 decades, and not as a secretary or janitor even a professor of landscape architecture with only a tangential connection to this whole issue. 

Quote from: Frys Girl on July 27, 2012, 05:53:45 AM
I wonder if Joe Paterno would have acted if it were his children in the cross-hairs of this monster. There is legal and moral responsibility, and everyone at Penn State failed to show either.

A NOTE TO ALL, JUST ATTACHED TO FRY GIRL'S POST:

There is a lot more to what happened at Penn State than the Freeh report and the national media would have you believe.

Check out Freeh and FIFA, for one thing.

Keep in mind who put Richard Jewell under the scope as the Atlanta Park bomber in 1996.

Check out the number of times the PSU Freeh Report (final version) has been amended (in some major factual areas) since its July release.

Check out what is actual evidence and what is supposition being used to form Freeh's conclusions.

Do not rely on the summary sections of the reports touted by the media.  They are there because that's what Freeh wants the focus on.  Study the 267 page report and analyze what's actually evidence and what is not. 

Ask yourself why Alycia Chambers' evaluation was essentially jettisoned in favor of Seasock's.  More important, see if you can figure out WHO BROUGHT SEASOCK IN when ADA Karen Arnold called off further evaluation of Victim 6. 

Remember that the premise of the Freeh report is that JP knew of JS's "CRIME" in '98 when hearing of the 2001 incident and failed to act.  YET THE '98 CASE WAS CLOSED, NO CRIME, by DPW, CYS, LE, DA's office.  The premise of the narrative is wrong.  Didn't stop ESPN from running with it on a slow news day.

Paterno DID report, followed university protocol, and IN FACT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN TROUBLE HAD HE FOLLOWED ANY OTHER ROUTE. 

Check out Emmert's absolute hypocrisy.  Football taking precedence over academics at Penn State?  You gotta be kidding me.  FB Player/athlete graduation rates at 87%--tied for top spot with Standford and higher than the general population of most universities, including PSU.   No difference between grad rate of black players and white players.  No evidence of bringing in athletically talented kids and using them, abusing them, tossing them away with no education. 

Emmert is a liar, a hypocrite, and a sanctimonious windbag. 

Start studying the names Tom Corbett (and Bonus Gate), Jack Raykovitz, The Second Mile, Bob Poole.  Study the York, PA pedophile ring.  Study the Hershey school sex scandal and Mike Fisher. 

Find out why our DA is missing.

That's all just for starters. 

If anyone wants to condemn Joe Paterno AFTER you get a solid grasp on some of the stuff I've outlined above, then we can talk. 

Until then, visit FRAMINGPATERNO.COM and YARDBIRD.COM for some more ways you can help start connecting the dots here.

Unless you just want to swallow the media crapola that's been sold to you. 

My apologies for any rant-like sound to this.  You folks are my cyber friends, my home away from home, and I don't mean to take anything out on you.  I really don't.  But PSU and State College and Centre County and Joe Paterno (and now his family) have been unjustly maligned, largely through the press.  When good, smart, thinking people like yourselves get hooked into that, I have to try to show you the other side.

Forces want our community to hang our heads in shame (as if the master manipulater Sandusky couldn't have happened ANYWHERE), promise we'll "learn" about child abuse and feel bad about it, and MOVE ON. 

But there is, I promise you, something being covered up that those forces want us to MOVE ON from so that an even greater corruption is not discovered. 

I have seen efforts to make this happen since April, 2005, long before Sandusky broke wide.

And I am not wearing a tinfoil hat. 

And most of you have probably detected, I'm fairly intelligent, not particularly gullible, and a good thinker.  At least I hope you see me this way. 

Please trust me that here at the Ground Zero of all this mess, a good number of us know what you're getting out there in media land is NOT THE TRUTH.

Quote from: Frys Girl on July 25, 2012, 12:08:58 PM


As to ancestry.com, what a bore. I'm not sure why anyone would pay to know if aunt josie mcclain could read and write. it's like a poor man's way to feel important. face it, if you're not a Bush or Rockefeller, no one cares about your ancestry.

Off-topic side trip here, but I kind of get it. With a very elderly mother who values family, I started working on family history for her about ten years ago because she wanted to know more about the generations who came before her grandparents.  W/out spending a penny on ancestry, I got into researching and found plenty of fascinating stuff that helped flesh out lives of some of our relatives for her. I was able to track down some people she had vague memories of from early childhood and see how they fit into the family and able to figure out why we had a small piece of handmade linen with a note that it had traveled from the Atlantic to the Pacific and back again and belonged with our family.

Little stuff. But the work was worth it and made an old lady happy.  No one outside the family cares, but they weren't supposed to.  Well, except for the part where one of us was married to Wallis Simpson and cuckolded when she left him for King Edward VIII, who abdicated the throne for her.  That part was pretty interesting. 

But I digress. 

Quote from: b_dubb on August 06, 2012, 08:04:08 AM
now that Ian has been reduced to once a month and Knapp appears semi weekly at most ... we have to hold our breath a long time between quality shows. just an observation. also I hate this

I am so with you, b_dubb.  I listen to re-runs of Knapp and Ian or to fineart stream on most nights; listen live to C2C ONLY when Ian or Knapp are on, which is pathetically few nights. 

I would seriously rather hear some Knapp UFO tale for the 15th time or Ian and the Biblical contradiction guy for the 6th than listen to the latest incarnation of "could it be angels?" with Noory or "1,001 Ways We'll Meet Destruction" with John-Boy.  And I don't care how deep his voice is. 

Quote from: Lester on July 28, 2012, 06:15:12 PM
  Why is goofy Ian still around  -- can't Ms. Lisa find anyone to fill his slot? 

Well, for starters, Ian did retire.  Coast begged him to do the one Sunday a month gig.  They knew they needed him along with Knapp for some semblance of credibility. 

Beyond that, Ian

a) actually reads the guests' books
b) talks articulately about the subject matter
c) has a wide and diverse set of experiences, education, background, etc. from which to draw in conversation with guests
d) pays attention to his guests; asks relevant questions to further a conversation
e) etc.

all things useful in a good host and all things lacking in Noory and Wells. 

Then there's the bonus round:

Listening to an old Ian show last night (I believe 3/20/2010).  Bad insomnia/sleep/insomnia night, so kind of woke to this--Ian talking about the issue of talk show hosts FEAR MONGERING and GUESTS FEAR MONGERING.  Topic was the secret world of infomercials, which led kind of naturally to this and how some hosts/guests use the airwaves to scare the bejesus out of folks and sell crap based on fear.  (Wells, anyone?)

Anyway, Ian made a big deal over how he'd been very vocal in refusing to take part in fear mongering in his part on Coast.  Informing, yes; fear mongering no.  Said he could possibly justify things like selling food because even if the world wasn't going to end in 2012, there might still be a tornado or hurricane and folks would have a product, a basement full of food to help them.  They'd paid money, gotten a product they could at least use.  He felt less horrible about that than a lot of stuff being "mongered" by infomercials and some C2C commericals. 

He likely crossed the C2C line a bit but I liked the way his principles guided his choices as host--no scaring his listeners to make money. 

Yeah, I love Ian as a host and as a person.  Sue me. 

Quote from: WOTR on July 29, 2012, 12:35:19 AM

In my estimation Wells ranks just one half of one notch lower than Noory.  I would actually sooner listen to Noory than Wells (at least that is what I say tonight- I reserve to swap the positions of the above mentioned hosts without notice.)

Witch'ya, babe.  No matter how much I try to give Wells a chance, he blows it again and again. 

Noory.  Well, he's the devil we already know.  Doesn't mean he gets any credits to his name, just that we know what to expect.

Like eating at McDonald's. 

Quote from: Paper*Boy on July 27, 2012, 08:48:02 PM
When is Ian on again? 

I expect our true cime and comic book expert to mount a stiring defense of violence in movies, TV, video games, and rap music, and how that couldn't possibly influence anyone to commit violent crimes in general, or the Aurora Batman movie massacre in particular.

Listen to Ian's two interviews with Dave Cullen, who spent 10 years researching Columbine and uncovering the myths that have pervaded the media and hence society regarding the alleged causes of that tragedy.

After listening to Cullen, you just might side with anyone who doesn't bite at the media-driven hype over video games, bullying, etc. 

The country got sold a lot of crapola regarding Columbine, starting with who the mastermind really was. 

Quote from: MV on July 26, 2012, 01:11:54 PM

i know how you feel.  2011 was like that for me.  what a shitty year it was.

Sorry to hear you just had to go through it too.  It's numbing.  But you put your shoulder to the grind wheel and keep on keeping on.  Ain't much other choice, as just about all of us know. 

I'm a female noorysuckser. 

I miss you guys like crazy but my distractions would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.  God needs to make family medical crises come at least in threes rather than fives, and he needs to make them come at the least consecutively, not simultaneously.

Or for the non-believers here, The Universe needs to do that.  Or something about no coincidences.  Remind me.  I'm losing my sense of humor.  Is it 1:11 yet?  Could it be an angel??

Or, maybe I wasn't missed in the "women haven't posted lately" sentiment, in which case, never mind. 

I was listening the other night to an old show where Ian filled in for George Knapp on one of those nights when Knapp was having technical difficulties.  Ian said he'd do it so long as he could keep the topics/guests, which included two interviews on Bigfoot. 

I fell asleep after the first guest (plan to listen to the second; it was Paulides).

But anyway, the first was a woman who had a degree in anthropology IIRC and had spent years studying Bigfoot with native Americans.  I was kind of dozing in and out (no reflection on host or guest, just a long day) but remember her saying Native Americans relayed stories about a species of Bigfoot (feet?) who had been/were/are? cannibals and who had actually stolen a lot of human children and roasted them because they tended to have fat content needed by Bigfoot/feet (I'll get the plural right eventually).

Just wondered how any of that might fit into our missing persons' stories. 

Quote from: RealCool Daddio on July 12, 2012, 11:43:12 PM


The real danger is folks taking the show too seriously.  To me, it was always about entertainment, and I think art got that. I seem to remember him saying (in a Wired interview?) that 99% of the stuff on the show was BS, but the fun was in finding the 1% that was real (rough quote, garbled by my age and lifestyle, no doubt).

You are a wise man, RCD. 

Quote from: dariakus on July 11, 2012, 02:26:10 AM
Wow, this Tesla Reincarnated guy is so out-of-it that it prompted me to finally make an account just so I could join in the "Wait, what?" conversation.

Holy moly.

Welcome, dariakus.  That's how most of us got here.   

Quote from: Sardondi on July 10, 2012, 04:16:13 PM
(Didn't he even let the pedophile talk?)

Someone refresh my memory: IIRC, he not only let the pedophile talk, but also suggested a future program where Noory would have said pedophile and other criminals on as guests. 

Did I make this up?  As Paper Boy has pointed out, this show is beyond parody, and I honestly don't know if I'm remembering a real event or remembering something we/I envisioned Noory doing. 

Quote from: WOTR on July 10, 2012, 12:30:07 PM
Not at all... re-reading my post I think that the point I was trying to make did not really come across (nor did my dismal attempt at humour.)  We (those on the spectrum) do not want to claim him as one or our own.  Normal people surely do not want him.  If I felt qualified to speak for those with a very low IQ I would give reasons why he does not fit that category either as I would not wish for him to have anything in common with me.  Heck, I assume that a monkey might learn to type in order to refute that George is one of them should anybody ever accuse George of being a primate.

It takes far more than that for me to feel offended (especially when the words come from one of my favourite posters...)

Awww . . . you made my morning, and I've got a splitting migraine, so I needed a pick me up. 

I did catch your humor, but I was simultaneously worried I'd offended one of *my* favorites here.  So we're even steven.  Except that I realize in the portion of my post you quoted, I cannot/did not proofread, which is disconcerting for an OCD type like me.  We all have our crosses to bear! 

And I can't think of a single group that would admit to wanting Noory.  Seriously. 

Quote from: WOTR on July 09, 2012, 02:07:16 AM
I am sorry... but we do not want him either. 

[snip]

Much like you, I am not a trained analyst (though I did once stay at a holiday inn and I have lived my life somewhere on the spectrum...)

I hope my post didn't offend you in any way, WOTR.  I don't life life on the spectrum, but I have a beloved nephew who does. 

Quote from: ziznak on July 09, 2012, 01:27:46 AM


I must say rob you are very dedicated to your argument and I find your involvement in "a SAR team for years" very telling as to your motivations here.

You beat me to it, Ziz.  Over the weekend, I had a chance to re-listen to a bit of the 3/25 show.  It hit me then--ol' Robo's white hot heat may result from the mild criticism Paulides occasionally offers of search groups. 

Interestingly, in the segment I revisted (perhaps less than an hour), Paulides and Knapp did address the paradoxical undressing issue. 

 

Quote from: Sardondi on July 07, 2012, 11:51:10 PM
Now where did that blasted "ignore" button go?....

Oh, Sardoni, my friend, you are so much wiser than I am.   

Quote from: rob69 on July 07, 2012, 10:00:28 PM
Please stick to studying cases.  As I mentioned earlier come on out or volunteer on a SAR.  Another point I didn’t mention is the ancillary phenomenon of terminal burrowing.  This is associated with the final stages of hypothermia. 

Paulides states that “clothing was found nearby and neatly folded”, since you are still waiting for his book from Amazon then you wouldn’t know that this was only mentioned in two cases he investigated.  And then it boils down to what he said. 

Methinks that maybe you should reserve any “conclusions” until you have:

1.   Read the book
2.   Understand the effects of hypothermia, paradoxical undressing and terminal burrowing.
3.   Volunteer on a SAR team for years to discover first hand #2.

Methinks also that maybe you are also related to David.

Now we get to see the real Rob and why he makes assumptions about Paulides.  Don't make assumptions about me. 

As for reading the book, well, damn it, I ordered it on 3/26/12.  I can't get more copies into Amazon's hands until there are more available.  Maybe you can send one to each of us.  In the meantime, I HAVE listened to 8 hours of interview conducted by a respected investigative journalist who's won more than a dozen emmy awards, an Edward R. Murrow award, writing awards from the AP, and at least one (if not more) Peabody award(s).  I think I'll trust that if Paulides were the horrible fraud you say he is, Knapp would have--at the least--raised some skeptical eyebrows for his listeners to consider regarding Paulides. 

At this point, most of us have a significant history with Knapp and put some trust in him.  With you, none. 

Quote from: rob69 on July 07, 2012, 09:47:38 PM
Come on out or volunteer on any organized SAR.  Finding someone who has succumbed to hypothermia is found in 90% of the cases with missing clothes.  This phenomenon is called paradoxical undressing.

Finding someone who has succumbed to hypothermia

Yeah, Rob.  Most of us know about paradoxical undressing and don't need your lesson.  What we need is your honesty in posts.  Your 90% figure wasn't given as 90% of missing persons who died from exposure (that was an "especially" tacked on at the end, with the "90%" figure standing as the whole group figure). Talk about lies of omission and commission.  You don't mention those who died from suicide, accident, or murder (none of whom are likely to engage in paradoxical undressing).

Paulides research starts from the premise that people go missing in the forests, national parks, wilderness areas, etc. on a regular basis all the time and die from exposure, falling in rivers, from accidents, blah blah blah BUT THAT IS NOT THE GROUP OF MP HE IS COLLECTING DATA REGARDING.

Quote from: Ben Shockley on July 08, 2012, 05:39:52 AM
Wells and Noory are like "Lucy" to the audience's "Charlie Brown."   They always trick-screw us with the faintest hope  of a through-the-goal-posts (i.e., tolerable) interview kick, but always leave us flat on our backs and disappointed.

Ha!  I think I actually posted a panel of Charlie Brown lying flat on his back after Lucy pulled the football away--AGAIN--some time back. 

We all feel the same way, don't we?

Quote from: ziznak on July 08, 2012, 09:31:57 AM
Looking up info about people especially C2C gasbags is Hals "thing."  Even just suggesting that your not sure about somebody's creds would incite Hal to do research on them.

Yep.  It's just what Hal does.  No need for over-reaction when he does it.  I kinda look forward to it, like the sun rising. 

Quote from: ItsOver on July 07, 2012, 11:03:12 AM
Ian talking with The Least Interesting Man in the World, Saddam Snoory, would be better than The Mother Ship, IMHO.  True, I wish the guests weren't complete trash but that's probably Saddam's chief horse holder and boot licker, Twit Tom, "helping out" Ian.

Yeah, we know hosts have had to lobby for certain guests and don't always get their say in who they have to take.

The minute I saw "Angels" in the promo, I thought for sure it was a Snoory show.  Not typical Ian fare.  But I'll withhold judgment and wait to see what Ian does with the topic/guest. 

It's tempting to agree with Sardoni's verbal projectile diarrhea (the Morons! Idiots! Imbeciles! etc. rant on the previous page) and go with the general flow here.

But you know what, folks?  We may be the idiots and imbeciles. 

Fact #1: No product line to sell with ghosts, bigfoot, aliens, etc., unless you consider Ed Dames' course in remote viewing.

Fact #2: Huge market and product line for diet, weight loss, health, general self-improvement and (as we've seen) end-of-the-world doom and gloom products.  Get your turmeric here!  Your carnivora!  Your gas masks, your e-foods direct, your ageless male supplements, your PX-90 (or whatever the hell that was)! 

I can hardly wait to hear about the diet pill line.

Oh wait.  I quit listening to C2C in live form (absent Knapp and Ian) more than 3 months ago. 

How many of us have said C2C was turning into an infomercial?  This is all part of the plan. . . .

Quote from: UFO Fill on July 07, 2012, 05:08:36 AM
I'm curious about this - do you have a cite?  Or did you mean the 90% figuratively.  I'd still like to see a good study about missing clothing.  And I suspect all missing clothing is not the same - for instance, we recently had a waitress at a strip club disappear.  She was last seen riding her bicycle away from the club at about 3AM.  She was found a few blocks away - dead in the woods. Her pants, bicycle and cell phone were missing.  I don't suspect bigfoot.

Good question, Fill.  I don't have a clothing study at my fingertips, but missing persons' cases are a passion of mine.  I'm kind of a forensics freak (hence the lovely bones moniker) and spend a ridiculous amount of time studying such cases.

Methinks Rob has just pulled the "90% of missing people, who are found dead, are found with articles of clothing missing" claim out of thin air.  Missing-found-dead come in all shapes and sizes, which is to say (as he surely knows) that some are found within hours of going missing while others aren't found till they're skeletonized months later while others aren't found for decades. 

With regard to clothing, the interesting thing about Paulides' cases were the number where clothing was found nearby and neatly folded.   In the thousands of MP cases I've read about, I have yet to come across your basic MP case where a killer folded the victim's clothing and left it near the body (Chandra Levy's sweatshirt was found near her skeletonized remains when found a year after her disappearance, for instance, but no one had folded it).  He also noted a number where the clothing was left in almost unimaginable positions, pants left in semi-standing positions, as if the person who'd worn them had been removed from them and the pants remained, semi-upright.  If Rob can show us police reports that contradict that kind of report, I'm open to listening.  But I also know that LE (and media) can be--uh--sometimes less than forthcoming in what they'll reveal in reports.  Sometimes they don't want the public to know certain things to reduce potential public panic; sometimes (as in the Mitrice Richardson case, among others) they want to cover their own behinds. 

Quote from: Sardondi on July 07, 2012, 01:12:58 AM
That's just it - he didn't, and even said more than once he drew no conclusions, just gathered, collated and presented the evidence. Apparently the "he said Bigfoot did it" thing arose out of the fact a witness to one missing person/abduction looked across to a mountainside in the area of the search for the missing child, and saw a large furry biped which looked like it was carrying something. The witness reported nothing at the time for fear of embarrassment  (other listeners, do I have that right?). Paulides merely reported what he was told, and even at that point resisted drawing what IMO was the obvious conclusion.

You got it right, Sardoni.

And that's where Rob's rant goes majorly astray for me.  He claims Paulides facts are "cherry picked and cobbled together to make his theory fit."

But Paulides does not offer a theory. 

So Rob is misreading/mishearing/misinterpreting what Paulides has done. 

Someone on the thread suggested a member of a rival Bigfoot group.  Wonder if that's the "personal connection" that causes the white hot heat?  Is there a concern from some corner (due to misreading) that Paulides is presenting dear Bigfoot as a maurading, murdering species kidnapping innocents in the wild and that his books will stir some kind of Bigfoot posses to start shooting Bigfeet (?) willy-nilly as retribution?

Quote from: ItsOver on July 06, 2012, 09:25:57 PM
With Snoory and The Mother Ship at C2C, it's fantastic to have a decent host with Knapp.  I hope he stays around.

You're not trying to keep this thread on topic or anything, are you?   

Knapp rocks. 

Quote from: Harmness on July 06, 2012, 08:00:10 PM
Mr. Dooley!  Love that Mick.

And what a great quote re the media.  All things considered, nothing has changed all that much except the delivery system. 

Quote from: Paper*Boy on July 06, 2012, 07:18:46 PM



Yeah I know, heard it recited by others from time to time.  What I still don't know is what 'afflicting the comfortable' had to do with Coast. 

I'm going to guess he didn't mean his hosting style... did he?

Nah . . . except for you.  Ian reserves special "hosting style" affliction just for you. 

Quote from: Sardondi on July 06, 2012, 08:47:01 AM
I think this nugget is getting closer to the Essence of George than anything else I've seen. I think you have beautifully sifted, analyzed and synthesized the evidence. It's not one chief thing, but (like with most people) a combination. You have written a damn brilliant post. Bravo.

Why thank you, Sardoni.  I have spent my life with the Combo Platter, and it is now paying off in my ability to analyze Noory.  (Well, maybe I helped some kids along the way.)