BellGab.com Archive

Quote from: Jethro on February 12, 2012, 07:18:07 PM
Whoa! If I had to validate whether a guest is credible, I would never have listened at all. I know I'm going to alienate  some here , but Coast to Coast is the Professional Wrestling of radio. It's neither credible and is completely incredible. When I listened, it was for entertainment reasons only.

That reminds me of a friend of mine who occasionally listens to the show . . . he listens purely for entertainment value.  "As for actually considering that it could be true?  No, I don't do that," he says.

Personally, I do think that the guests run the gamut of the very credible to the wildly incredible. 

If you listen to Coast, then I would think that you at least leave open the possibility that aliens might be visiting us, that ghosts could really haunt the world, that we may actually go onto something when we die.  And if it's the case that these things are possible, then I would think that some researchers will have something that's actually worthwhile to say on the subject.

So for me, it's about separating the chaff from the wheat.

First time poster, though I've lurked around for a while.  Since my interest in the show as of late has been waning, I figured it was time to register once I found this thread.

In some regards, I do think that the topic is the problem.  Health stuff, politics, the climate, the environment . . . who cares.  Like some previous posters have said, that's not why I listen to Coast to Coast. 

But for the more speculative topics--the reason I DO listen to Coast to Coast--it all comes down to credibility.  The bottom line is that I need to have a reason to believe the guest.  Who are they?  Are they a credentialed scientist or academician?  Are they a legitimate journalist?  Or are they merely some random person with an extraordinary claim?

The big problem with the latter is that it's simply impossible to validate the truth of what they say.  This does not mean they're lying.  Just because someone sounds like a hoaxer/mentally unbalanced person because their claim is so ridiculous does not mean that it's so.  I mean, if someone says they are channeling aliens from Zeta Reticuli or spirits from the 7th dimension, then hell, maybe they are.  But unless these aliens or spirits give information that can be validated that would otherwise be impossible to know then there is just no way to know the person making the claim is legit, and unfortunately this never happens.

There are plenty of topics that would be quite interesting to me as long as the guests are legit and the topics are handled the right way.  For UFO topics, I prefer that the host is George Knapp, because he knows what's up and will handle the guests appropriately, and he usually only has guests that have a story that seems believable.  I also listen to just about anything with Ian--who I think is great, even though he seems to have some haters on here--because he is not shy about challenging his guests and he also covers topics that are interesting to me.  I've read a lot of responses that they turn the dial when religion comes up, but I'm fine as long as the guest is credible and it's handled well.

Beyond that, it's just real hit and miss . . . and unfortunately probably more misses than hits.

If it's a show about channeling I pretty much never listen, because there is no way to validate their claims unless they channel something unknowable--like that an unlikely event is going to occur on a certain date at a certain time--and then this proves to be true.  But that never happens.

Remote viewing can be interesting as long as the guest isn't Ed Dames, but the subject has lost a lot of its luster to me now that it's clear that even if remote viewers really do have a psychic ability, it's not something that can be harnessed and used with any degree of reliability.

Ghosts shows can be interesting, depending on the guest.  If it's a haunted history show I might listen in.

Run o' the mill psychics, astrologers, and the Numbers Lady are no goes.  Who cares.  Not because the topic could not be interesting, but because the content of the Coast shows is not interesting.  I've heard a lot of stories of astrology being used in interesting ways, but on Coast it's usually just fools making claims that are too vague and general, or that are too wild and of course don't come true.

Anything to do with demons is usually a pass for me.  I've had it with the self-appointed "demonologists" who supposedly have all this information about this race of otherworldly creatures.  How do you know this?  Oh wait, that's right, you really don't.

EVP can be cool, but my interest in the subject has waned.  We need to figure out how to establish true, high-quality back and forth conversation.  Until then, I have better things to do than try to figure out if those are actually words, where they came from, and what they mean.

Reincarnation can be cool as long as either a) the guest is a researcher connected to Ian Stevenson, or b) the person is a credentialed therapist who uses past-life regression therapy.

Mediumship used to be a big one to me, but these days, how can you tell who's legit?  It seems to me that you just can't.  James Van Praagh and Sylvia Browne are instant channel changers for me.

NDEs can be good, depending on various factors.  I like to hear medical professionals' take on the subject.

The Crypto stuff is hit and miss.  It's not a big subject for me.  I will listen to it, but it doesn't get me pumped or anything.

I do like a lot of the random one-off stuff, like the rock star curse shows, the television stuff where they have on producers/writers/directors etc, or whatever else that may be interesting and different from what's usually done.

All in all, I miss really enjoying C2C.  I used to listen to just about every episode and enjoyed it about 90% of the time.  Now a week or more can go by before something pops up that I actually care about.

Thankfully there's The Paracast, but it is almost exclusively UFOs and it's only once a week.  It would be nice if they would branch out more and they also need to understand that not every show on the "supernatural" has to feature Rosemary Ellen Guiley.

Anyway, that's my $.02. . .