BellGab.com Archive

I once supported Rush Limbaugh, until I realized that he is only a talker in life. Sure, he gets great ratings. But the common person can be ignorant, and lack direction for themselves. They seek others to tell them what to think. They seek others to mold their own views. Because, unlike me, they can't do it for themselves.

Limbaugh talks. Talk. It is not the talker that matters in the struggle for life as some of us endure. And his trashing of the truly disabled people -- not the numerous fakers -- proves to me how little this man knows of life. Real life.

Limbaugh has never lost a limb. He has no idea how difficult and challenging your life can be when you lose a leg. None at all. And yet, he feels compelled in his great American spirit -- supposed toughness -- to slam people like me. I worked 25 years in corporate and professional jobs and paid dearly into the Social-Security Disability system. That's why we do. God forbid, for example, if we ever sustain a limb loss.

Limbaugh conducts himself like a pompous ass. He's put himself about human nature, and insults the human experience by claiming his "talent is on loan from God." Hardly. To those that have truly lived and endured, he represents those who talk big -- but can't carry it out once they're faced with real adversity.

Limbaugh exalts himself. And I've learned that those who exalt themselves will eventually be humbled. And have to face themselves and examine who and what they're made of.

I'm not surprised millions listen to Rush. I'm not surprised millions of people stick their heads in the television, either. Which I don't anymore. Nor ever will. The television-head mentality represents those who can't see or envision for themselves, and are willing to let others do that for them.

And people like Limbaugh are right there -- as is our country's tendency these days -- to take advantage of that.

To me, all I gave up on Coast To Coast AM after what I heard George Norry state to a guest on air one night -- when it comes to any type of programming, talk-radio or otherwise:

"It's all about ratings."

There you have it. There's no gray area. Any program's integrity matters not. Any program's credibility matters not. All long as it draws high ratings for a network, it goes on. And he summed up what Coast To Coast AM is right now -- a program bent only on maintaining high ratings (i think it's called a market share), and one in which the validity of what it's doing doesn't matter. One bit.

At least, in admitting that, Norry illustrated the program can be what it wants, regardless of the nonsense it often dishes out posing as science and -- God forbid -- truth.

At least I have Fox-Sports Radio overnight. These days, it puts Coast To Coast AM to shame. And the latter cares not what it's made of, as long as there's money to be made by what it does.

Quote from: anagrammy on February 13, 2011, 07:50:25 AM
I've always wondered what happened to the Bigfoot refrigerator hoaxters.  Did they have to enter the witness protection program or what! LOL
Anagrammy

LOL! I saw their rotten video when they burned a book by the credible Bigfoot researcher Loren Coleman. Who was once a guest on Coast To Coast AM. Not anymore, considering the mess that program has become.

And, for a good laugh, feel free to listen to Tom Biscardi on blog-talk radio with his "Bigfoot Lives" weekly broadcast. It's worth the laugh.

Good point. I will follow up on these Georgia hoaxers, and find out what they paid for in the end for their deception. And fraud.

Maybe, the way Coast To Coast AM is going, the hoaxers will appear as guests in the near future. To describe how they are right and the rest of the world is wrong.

Thanks for your reply.

And from what I researched online last night, I found out Harley Hoffman of the deep. dark, dense, wintering woods of British Columbia, Canada, hasn't spoken out about that film since 2001. Nearly a decade now. But, from what I read online, he left with this statement, to the effect:

If he can bring one of those animals from Northwest Canada in a cage to the public, would you believe him, then?

I say: Perhaps so.

I have to find the extended interview. When he stated that animal saw the cellphone-filmmaker and then went on its way like like the human wasn't even there.

Like those humans weren't even there.

Michael V:

I hate to be a couple of years behind. But I admit I didn't know about her death until a few months ago. After "checking" online about what she was "up to" these days, I discovered she passed away:

Bettie Mae Page (April 22, 1923 â€" December 11, 2008)

Age: 85

Now, I admit I heard on ABC news radio when she was hospitalized after her heart attack at the time in December, 2008. But I never heard a follow up about her lapsing into a coma, and having her surviving family "pull the plug" on her life support after roughly two weeks.

If you don't know who she was, all, here is the website run by people that came along along after the electronic age that the aged Ms. Page admitted she didn't understand:

http://www.bettiepage.com/

Nothing like an 'ole girl from Nashville (Kingsport), Tennessee making good. She is a classic in American pop culture.

I once dated an Arkansas girl that was her spittin' image. Her spittin' image. And never knew it.

Quote from: anagrammy on February 11, 2011, 01:06:37 AM
VERY interesting. Thanks for posting this-- I wasn't familiar with this one.  Another reason I'm glad I joined Coastgab.

Anagrammy

Thanks for your reply. And thinking further. Darn me. Somewhere online, there's a longer video in which Harley Hoffman describes the film further. I recall seeing it months ago, I regret not bookmarking it then. After your post, I tried to search it, but failed so far.

I will continue to find it. And post it when I do.

Hoffman described, if I remember correctly, how the subject of that film knew people were watching it that day -- and purposefully made itself visible to the filmmakers.

As if the human didn't exist.

I will continue to seek the longer video interview.

Quote from: b_dubb on February 12, 2011, 11:12:11 PM
bottom line (for me): i'm just not sure.  but i think it's a pretty amazing piece of film.  has anyone tried to reproduce similar footage with technology that was available in the late 60's?  that would be a pretty interesting experiment.  maybe one for Mythbusters

Yes, Mr. John Chambers tried to reproduce the level of "nudity" seen in the Patterson-Gimlin film during his costuming tasks for "Beneath The Planet Of The Apes" (Studio Financier: 20th Century Fox, 1970) with the "sauna scene" with Mr. James Gregory (playing a Gorilla) and Mr. Maurice Evans (playing an Orangutan).

And he admitted he failed trying it. And stated his own efforts -- as the best monster creator in Hollywood on the late late 1960s -- looked too fake.

The late Mr. Chambers admitted that if he'd built that costume, he'd accepted credit for it. 

Quote from: b_dubb on February 04, 2011, 04:40:38 AM
FFS - if i'm looking for a distration, i'll turn on the BBC or listen to the farm report.  rather than listen to George mangle the English language and hear some caller (stoned out of their gourd) drone on about the leprechaun that just did cartwheels through their living room

let's see if Hoagland appears anytime soon on the show.  if so ... i'm calling bullshit on the whole thing and punching out

I agree. I gave up listening to Coast To Coast AM because I feel it's lost a good measure of credibility. And continues to do so.

I tune into Fox-Sports Radio instead. They may have some nutty callers and such, but a least they don't take themselves as seriously as Coast To Coast AM does.

Quote from: b_dubb on February 03, 2011, 08:40:22 PM
so do all Russians have guns?  you know it's a party when they bust out the processed meat.  good times

MEAT IN A CAN!!!! DELICIOUS!!!!

No. From what I learned having spent time in the former Soviet Union: Although people have sporting arms to shoot mink and game, only the authorities are allowed to have and shoot guns "out of season."

But, as you note, these men know how to have a good time. And they will invite you in such as they show. If you earn their respect. I know the meat in a can may not be the best thing, but it's what they have.

And know that these Russian men all have sisters. Some are quite gorgeous. Get on their good side...and Da! [Yes, In English]...enough said.

Quote from: The General on February 03, 2011, 12:55:19 PM
Oh perfect.  The only thing more painful than listening to George Noory is listening to Alex Jones interview George Noory.
I won't be listening.  It will be a colassal conspiracy theory ass-hat ego stroking echo chamber feedback loop.

Right on. If there's ever been a non-critical, "I'll adhere to whatever my guests say like it's some infomercial, without invoking analytical and logical, experience thinking" talk-radio host it's become Mr. George Noory.

Sorry to say. But, as a critical thinker and visionary, it's how I feel.

Quote from: Michael V. on February 03, 2011, 01:43:08 PM
fyi, all alex jones threads have now been merged into one thread.

Good work, Michael V. It needs to be merged into the "totally paranoid, nonsensical and absolutely logistically impossible to carry out thread."

Thanks.

Quote from: Lena on February 02, 2011, 02:00:20 PM
I am too young to be KGB trained, so you probably mean FSB.

Isn't it now called "The Ministry Of The Interior"? I forget what it's called these days. Please correct me if I'm wrong, so I will learn. Thanks.

Isn't this them in?:

ЛЮБЭ "Прорвемся!" (Опера`)

Quote from: George Drooly on January 30, 2011, 03:06:19 AM
No one but Bell. He created and owned the show, end of story. All others are pretenders. It's like someone other than Charles Schulz drawing "Peanuts" -- NOT RIGHT

Agreed. It's like someone portraying Ralph Cramden without Jackie Gleason. And, heaven forbid in our entertainment industry of "copying" today, someone redoing The Three Stooges without the Horowitz Brothers or Larry Feinstein. I have the feeling they will.

We need new ideas and fresh thinking that builds on what's been done before. Not redoes. And it's a shame that Mr. Art Bell built such a great program for independent thinkers, and it seems like the people running Coast To Coast AM have run out of ideas.

I have a lot of them, but I'm not being paid to come up with them. They must do that for themselves.

Quote from: onan on February 01, 2011, 08:15:38 AM
I need clarification. Are you saying all terrorists are muslims? or are you informing us that was the position coming from some whacknut from C2C?

Just in case however... IRA comes to mind.

All I'm pointing out, is that every American who dare rides on an airplane these days is treated to the "you may be a terrorist mentality." And subjected to harmful, radioactive body screening, for one.

Now, I agree about Timothy McVeigh. He was not only a "homegrown terrorist," but a decorated American military veteran as well. But none of his plots involved air travel.

To clarify: No, not all Muslims are terrorists, as I stated. I've lived among them and known some that are true, good people.

But, so far in the United States, every person that has tried or carried out some offense through air travel has been a Muslim. That is all I'm saying. And I note that such are perverting and twisting the Nation of Islam beliefs to suit their ends.

Also note that after Sept. 11, 2001, none of these "wanna-be" terrorists originated in a flight inside the United States. They boarded flights from abroad. Not from within.

I feel it shameful that now every American is treated as a possible threat at U.S. airports. By doing that, our country shows how our enemies succeed by causing us to turn on each as we have.

That I disagree with.

To clarify. We've come a long way since the post-9/11 "United We Stand" speeches. We need to unite for real, and that's something we are becoming further removed from these days.

We should be good to one another. As I do in life. Do I need to point this out?

After turning off tonight's broadcast, I have to ponder:

Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims.

I've known Muslims that are the salt of the Earth. And, true, good people. But, after hearing tonight's garbage called Coast To Coast AM, I'll tune out.

And I turned that crappy radio program off, and switched to Fox-Sports Radio.

What depths Premiere Radio Networks sinks to. At least, Sports-Talk Radio is made of something.

What a disgrace Coast-To-Coast AM has become to the American airways these days.

Years ago, I admit, I had a crush on a very gorgeous, dark-haired young woman who's father and mother ran a gas station. She was from Tehran, Iran. Her dad was loyal to the Shah, and they escaped from Iran when she was a little girl from the revolution of some maniac she called "The Ayatollah Khomeini."

"And I Ran. I Ran So Far Away." Ha!

OK, all. Harley Hoffman may subscribe to "The Search For Santa" or whatever. Now, I have not been able to track this man down online -- neither has Coast To Coast AM -- to ask critical questions. But this is what he claimed himself or his brother, from what I heard, filmed in Northwestern Canada:

I've seen a number of films -- supposedly showing actual Bigfoot subjects -- come and go over the years. Most are downright laughable, obvious hoax attempts. But in my studies of such films, I recently came upon one that I considered unique.

I could find little information about it, except that it was attributed to one Harley Hoffman, and was taken in 2001 in British Columbia. The clearest video clip I found was posted here:

Real Bigfoot Video Exclusive (Harley Hoffman)

In my view, this film teeters on the edge of credibility and incredibility. First of all, I'll say that if that's a costume, it's a rather detailed one. Although the subject stays in frame only briefly, I note its apparent size -- mainly height and broadness -- compared with the surrounding environment. It has some scale to it, and I can tell it's big -- whatever it is.

If it's a person in a costume, it's a large person who's unusually wide, or the outfit itself has outstanding bulk. And I perceive a degree of musculature in the subject's shoulder and upper-back movements.

I also note the apparent patchy fur, and it's dark -- basically black -- coloration. Costumed hoaxers I've seen employ outfits with uniformed, even-distributed body hair or fur coverings. In addition, Bigfoot costumes I've seen use a brown color scheme, although the Halloween-type Gorilla novelty suits tend to be ebony in color. But the subject in "The Hoffman Film" sure doesn't look like any stock Halloween-type costume I've seen.

That suggests that modifications would be required to make it appear more credible, and I have my doubts that's what I'm seeing there. Also, the subject appears to have some sort of obtrusion on its upper back, from what I see. It resembles those square, padded neck and head protectors I've seen football players wear. Or maybe it's just my failing eyesight in my middle age, or some effect from the dark subject area -- or the lighting itself.

I'll say that the subject I see in this video bears a remarkable similarity to the subject I see in the Patterson-Gimlin film. It appears these two subjects are physically related, as it refers to a common ancestry or genetic background. And I do not feel it's case of reverse engineering by the costume-maker -- if it's such.

Considering the videos of supposed Bigfoot I've seen, it's only "The Hoffman Film" that comes close to having that same measure of "Boy, that looks like a real one" that I feel marks the subject seen in the 1967 film.

Now the downside of what I see. The subject stays in frame only briefly and fleetingly. There also appears to be some editing done on the clips, where the subject is at close first, then is seen at a distance in the next shot. And the subject never turns to the camera, keeping its front out-of-shot. Without being viewed from this angle, the subject lacks the detail seen in the Patterson-Gimlin film.

For those who haven't seen the digital enhancement of the subject's "mug shot" from the Patterson-Gimlin film, I found a "magnify-able" (enlarge and take a good look!) image posted here:

http://sasquatch-pg.net/

http://sasquatch-pg.net/index_files/home_files/patti-photo-enhancement.jpg

So, with "The Hoffman Film," we have the subject walking away from camera shot, so added physical detail is absent. And the subject never seems interested in the filmmaker, if it even recognizes or acknowledges the fact it's being observed.

I'll conclude that I believe in what I am seeing as some sort of unique species -- and not a costumed individual. I feel something "real" is captured on that film, and that it's also not some computer-generated, "digital special effect."

Like the Patterson-Gimlin film, if it's a hoax, it's a good one. -- and I've been fooled once again.
--------------------------

Quote from: C110 on January 31, 2011, 05:05:13 PM
I think the Patterson film is a fake.  Sorry to say that.   I wanted it to be for real.   The first time I saw the Patterson film was as a kid on the tv series In Search Of hosted by Leonard Nemoy.  I believed the footage then but as I got older I began to think it was all a hoax.   Much like the Travis Walton abduction case,  it didn't take much time searching the internet to realize this was also a hoax.

Yes, as the wildlife biologist accurately points out in the video link in my original post, it can't be proved or disproved one way or another. So, I conclude as an amateur scientist, it all hinges on the power of belief.

I know reliable anthropologists who visited the Bluff Creek site within a few years, and took matching photographs of the same landmarks seen in the film. And superimposed the transparencies. Such estimated the height of the subject at seven-feet, three inches. Now, if so, as I believe, how many of us know some 'ole boy who stands seven-foot-three, and has the body mass to costume and relate such musculature?

Thanks for your reply. And thanks for doubting it. We want the real answers to our world. If we all agreed on everything, our quest for knowledge and truth would never advance.

Quote from: James G. on January 30, 2011, 06:09:11 PM
That's the late Micheal Peter Hall.

Journalist correction: His name was Kevin Peter Hall. A former collegiate basketball player turned "movie monster." Because of his height. He was the first black man I've heard of that has done that. Now, the stout Michael Clarke Duncan (but only six-foot-five inches) was costumed as a Gorilla in The Planet Of The Apes (2001). But Hall was less broad, although taller than Duncan -- and the white actors like Mr. Richard Kiel, James Gregory, or and the late Mr. Ted Cassidy (see below) who preceeded him. (Note: The late Mr. Cassidy is listed as six-foot, nine inches. Also: note additional credit: Star Trek, 1966, What Are Little Girls Made Of?, as Ruk. Note the wire-frame costume to make him appear broader.

Hall portrayed Harry -- as seen in the video, and also costumed as the alien seen in Predator (1987). I had to cheat and look it up on the internet. Us old-timers shouldn't do that.

But note all, despite the costume, he still has human proportions. Although that's a Bigfoot costume, the arms are too short and the legs too long to match the Patterson-Gimlin subject. And his costume lacks muscular. In my view. Having been around Great Apes. I'll say that.

I do my best to correct errors of information. Thanks for your patience, all.

Quote from: Evil Twin Of Zen on January 30, 2011, 01:03:50 AM
And what does Sasquatch think of the evidence so far? 

Harry Laughing

That's the late Micheal Peter Hall. He died after contracting AIDS from a blood transfusion sustained after an automobile accident. Although he stood nearly seven-foot-two inches (as a former collegiate basketball player once spotted in Los Angeles by a Hollywood film maker), he lacked the body mass to pose as a Bigfoot. Hence his costume. Now, look into the late Mr. John Chambers.

He once worked with Mr. Richard Keil (roughly six-foot seven inches), and Mr. James Gregory (roughly six-foot-two inches). And Mr. Chambers worked with the late Mr. Ted Cassidy (roughly six-foot-eight inches -- the proverbial Lurch from the Addams Family; note the wire frame to make him appear broader). See Mr. Cassidy "stripped down" in Butch Cassidy And The Sundance Kid (1969) as Harvey. Scrawny, isn't he?

John Chambers costumed Mr. James Gregory (a scrawny, middle-age white man -- Inspector Luger in the "Barney Miller" sitcom years later) in "Beneath The Planet Of the Apes." As General Urus. And making Gregory appear massive. And, by the time he was done with the costume, it weighed nearly 120 pounds. And Chambers tried the nude, "sauna" scene with Mr. Gregory trying to match the Patterson-Gimlin film. And he admitted he failed. Because there's muscular that he couldn't duplicate.

And that was why, as Mr. Chambers explained, the gorillas in those movies had to wear clothes.

Now, look at the Patterson-Gimlin film. That subject is nude.

Call me a nut and I admit I can be wrong, but I feel that's some animal.

Quote from: The General on January 29, 2011, 10:27:08 PM
It's just frustrating that all the evidence is so circumstantial.  Grainy film, plaster casts that can be faked, witnesses with stories that can't be proven.  Where are all the Sasquatch bodies?  Bones?  Show me a dead Sasquatch and I'll believe the Patterson film.  Really, I do want to believe, but that doesn't make it real.

Yes, General, it can be frustrating. I agree. Yet, I have woods surrounding my home that are full of squirrels.

Yet, explore those woods. You won't find any dead squirrels -- other than road kills. You won't find any bones or any evidence these animals exist. Nature tends to take care of its own.

As nuts as I sound, please recall this account from Fred Beck. Now, he may have been some delusional person. But he describes the Sasquatch as some creature that assumes a physical shape and then assumes a spiritual shape.

But, General, I agree with your rationale as a scientist. It makes no sense that we have no real evidence. So, maybe, this may be true. It would make a great discussion on Coast To Coast AM, if that program would make sense. As it doesn't anymore.

I hope this link holds up:

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/classics/beck.htm

What do you all think of what this 'ole boy from the backwoods says? And I've known a lot of 'ole boys.'

Quote from: Lena on January 29, 2011, 11:58:20 PM
I like to skip subjects when the meaning is clear, and I sometimes drop apostrophes when writing fast.
I am looking for an American boy who helps me learn by slapping my butt a bit,
but first please start a new thread with my mistakes and correct them according to the Queen's English.
I'd really like to see that, and would be very grateful.

Dear Lena: Feel free to start a new thread. If you are truly Russian, I know the English language isn't easy to grasp. I admit, when I traveled in South Russia, the Russian language wasn't easy for me. I made a lot of mistakes. Slavic languages aren't based on Latin or Greek, and I know it must be overwhelming.

Such as who I knew in Russia attempted to learn British English. Although I'm a Yankee of U.S. literacy, my greatest influences as a writer were British English.

I apologize if you feel insulted. I admit that Russian Cyrillic was a tough thing for me to grasp. It made so sense.

Thank you for your patience with me.

Quote from: The General on January 29, 2011, 11:19:47 PM
You've got to cut her a little slack, she's Russian bro. 
She's doing a lot better in English than we would do in Russian.

Yes, General, I agree. My grasp of Russian is limited as well, so I conclude you're correct. I do know all the curse words in Russian, from having been there, so I give you credit for pointing that out, sir.

Quote from: Lena on January 29, 2011, 08:50:31 PM
opie/anthony is a show by halfwits for halfwits. i cant watch them, they make me sick.
I listened to the first 2 , and the exit. proved my opinion about them (again).

Dear Lena: In all respect, please work on your grasp of my beloved English language:

Here's a 'free" lesson:

cant? This is a contraction, from "I Cannot" to "can't." Not cant. Note the contraction.

I could go on about your sentences. They lack literacy in the English Language. Please remember that when you write a verb, you need a subject. This is basic Queen's English.

I respect your views, young lady, but I can tell you never submitted an approved thesis in any major U.S. or United Kingdom institute of higher learning.

That's all. In all respect.

OK, all let's dissect this analysis of the Patterson-Gimlin film. OK, I admit I agree with these scientists. But, all, what do you think?
What do you all think?

I spent a lot of time in zoos years ago, as a young amateur herpetologist. And I knew men who handled Great Apes. And I must agree about how odd those tracks appear to not coincide with the known, identified to science, certain species of gorillas, orangutans, and chimpanzees.

I'll say that some kind of biped animal, yet unidentified to science.

Once more, all, amateur scientists or whatever, what do you think?

To me, as former horse rider, what's real about this:

The subject of that film, do doubt, has never seen a horse before. Now it sees three of them. It has no idea those four-legged animals are not  predators. Roger Patterson's mount throws him down immediately, on the mere sight of that subject. The pack horse bolts, and runs off. Bob Gimlin's mount rears and retreats, and his horseman skills keep him from being thrown. I know I'm not that good!

Mankind is the only thing that can harm or kill at a distance. The subject knows that. It wants to maintain some distance from those horses. And, as I conclude logically as a scientist, looks back -- as we see in the film -- to ensure those horses aren't advancing.

Horses aren't dumb as people think. If that's a person in a suit, I'd be very surprised a horse would react like that. Very Surprised. These men are cowboys and cavalrymen, and they learned to trust their mounts. Why, all of a sudden, are these horses panicking? Over a man in a suit?

Hardly.:

Bigfoot - Sasquatch evidence analysis

Rob Simone:

What Do You Think, All?

I wasn't impressed last night.

He never challenged the guest about people paying some $120 fee to have this person predict his or her future through astrology. And what I considered to be true "junk science."

Mr. Simone never questioned whether the guest "had the goods," or whether he was misleading people to make money. He sat silent. Like Mr. George Noory.

What's the difference, all, between a program that was once for major, independent thinkers who see further -- and the infomercial mess it appears to have become to me?

I had to ask. All you true thinkers. I have to ask.

At times, I feel bad for Mr. Ian Punnett. And Mr. George Knapp. I sense that they both want to question, inquire and doubt, but they're prevented -- or discouraged -- from doing so.

Now we see why Mr. Art Bell is out. Because he did.

Quote from: Do you think it was angels? on January 22, 2011, 03:47:08 PM
What are you saying here?  You have been on multiple flights that were hijacked by Al Qaeda attackers, so you can imagine how it went down?  What possible life experience could you have that would bring any bearing on this?

No, sir, I'm not saying I was ever on hijacked flights. But, at the time, I could see how four to five operatives could have done what they did. I've been around enough to envision how it could have went down. Without some elaborate conspiracy involved.

Never before has anyone not needed a flight crew to pilot the craft. That was a first. Airlines were ill-prepared for such a scenario. Because it never happened before.

We were all used to supposedly "normal flights." We're too concerned with what we're going to do when we arrive at our destination to consider what could be going on at the present. Because things like that didn't happen. It's called infinite complacency. We must realize that just because something hasn't happened before, doesn't meant it can't happen now or in the future. And that's what those bastards took advantage of. And we learned from that.

That is all. Thanks for your reply.

I'll note the bit from last year, when Richard C. Hoagland went on his tear about the supposedly impending, methane-gas catastrophe along the Gulf Coast.

Which never happened. And, in the name of creating a panic, Hoagland never apologized for being incorrect. As he most often is.

And as I've seen -- and heard -- in the Coast To Coast AM advertising, they hate to see a "good crisis (or a made-up one) go to waste."

Immediately, it was implied that Gulf-Coast residents needed to buy from eFoods Direct because "evacuations are imminent."

If Clear Channel doesn't believe me, it can play back those ads from last year and hear the word "imminent" for itself.

Such was misinforming people. And no one questioned Hoagland for his prediction, because I heard it being "working into ads" for the ignorant masses who believed him.

After that, I gave up on the program's scientific credibility.

After that last straw with Hoagland, I suggested Coast To Coast AM get the rights to use and play Iron Maiden's Run To The Hills as an apropos bumper when Hoagland starts dishing out his varied "disasters are looming and upcoming" broadcasts.

Quote from: Robert1972 on January 25, 2011, 10:59:38 AM
Love the question George asked at the end of the first guest interview about crop circles  "how many people know about crop circles?"  Is that the best he could come up with?  Some of the worst interviewing I have heard.

Agreed. Coast To Coast AM has become its own self parody to overnight talk radio. Mr. George Noory is neither a scientist, nor a journalist. And that shows every night. How funny!

But it makes for great humor these days. It's now a late-night infomercial called Coast To Coast AM that even funnier than the colon-cleaner guy!

Right now, I don't blame Art Bell for giving up his association with what's become of Coast To Coast AM. It's no longer an avenue for critical, true and visionary thinkers. But a way for people to hawk their wares without any opposition. I give it zero credibility, except for the laugh it poses in the name of knowledge in this world.

So sue me. Or say what you want about me. I can use the publicity -- for my own character defamation. I hide nothing from anyone, so I have no issue in presenting myself as a true American -- and a human being.
 
Next, if he has half a wit -- as I know he does, I expect Mr. Ian Punnett to drop your program as well. George Knapp will probably follow, because I know he's no infomercial host.

Now, Coast To Coast AM provides great humor and has become a source of fair comment and criticism. Again, sue me -- and create publicity -- if you dare publicity or privately challenge my assertion it's nothing but an overnight infomercial.

For example, such at Coast To Coast AM will have to explain Dr. Richard C. Hoagland's claims of being some science adviser. Research him on line sometime. He was a curator of some museum, while persons and organizations that he's claimed to advised have publicity disavowed such claims. Look it up, please.

Such as Mr. Noory fail to ask critical questions of these guests. No wonder, all, Mr. Bell retained his integrity and influenced those like myself who once -- 'once" believed in the program.

As we no longer do. So such for science, and so much for real, objective thinkers -- and journalists.

For every guest that comes on, sir, I suggest they allow another guest equal time. To question and interrogate these guests. But I know, as any infomercial does, they won't.

Enough. I'm tired. Of having people like them mislabel and misjudge true people like me.

These days, Coast To Coast AM sounds like some half-wits that host radio infomercials. No matter what baloney some guest shovels out, it's considered "fascinating," "intriguing," "thought-provoking," and God knows what else.

Enough said.

Exactly. No wonder Mr. Atr Bell quit the program. And next, despite the loss of revenue to himself, so will Mr. Ian Punnett. As a supposed man of God, I'm sure he can live without a few things.

The program should become an object of ridicule with Into The Night With Tony Bruno.

We should have the human right to make fun of this mess at every turn. Considering tonight's guest. What a joke!

A real laugher!

Thank God for the sanity of overnight sports-talk radio. I bet Mr. Ben Maller of Fox-Sports Radio is biting his tongue right now, if he ever encounters Mr. George Noory. Biting his tongue. Ha! he has better lunatics that you!

Mr. Maller has better, more credible lunatics on his overnight Los Angeles radio program than they ever do!

You want lunatics? Switch the dial to Fox-Sports Radio. Ha!

What a rambling idiot this guest is. So sue me! I'd welcome it. He has no idea about what he's saying. He'd make a good witness on the stand! He'd lose every jury I could ever conceive.

He makes no sense! None! LISTEN! But, again, all, this is now Coast To Coast AM. The overnight infomercial. What a strange discussion! Good for Mr. Art Bell: The heck with this show!

He talks about things about some near-death he obviously know nothing about. Unlike me. What a laugher! Just listen to this person.

How funny. No wonder Mr. Art Bell wrote this program off.

Does this guest make one lick of sense? Ha! Where do they get them from, all?