Ian Punnett

[Lovely Bones]

  Let the guest the introduce the topic and talk as much as possible!

True as a rule? 

Sure.  Knapp practices this, and it's a good thing.

But I give Ian a pass, because--having listened to him for so long--it seems to me he is most prone to doing this when he's so excited about the stuff he's read about he is literally incapable of putting the brakes on his mouth.  So I would rather have a host that talks too much out of enthusiasm than a) a dullard like Snoory who can't think of a single thing to say if it's not on his stupid 3X5 cards or even b) a guy like Wells who seems to be trying but leaves way too much dead air for my tastes. 

Maybe that's all personal preference too.  If so, well, then that's all just my opinion.

I just listened to part of an old show of Ian's last night, an hour of open lines and the first hour of an interview on the dumbing down of the "under 30" generation due to technology.  I really couldn't reconcile all the criticisms I've heard here (largely from PB) with the Ian I was hearing. 

He had a call in Open Lines from a woman whose cousin had committed suicide, and he was just absolutely pitch perfect in how he handled dealing with her questions about family dynamics and the aftermath of suicide, the perfect pastoral counselor all in less than three minutes without making the caller feel as if she had been short-shrifted (could not imagine Noory taking that call).

Listened to him deftly deal with a multi-repeat caller who wanted (for the 107th time) to read him Bible verses supporting the use of marijuana ("Let me cut to the chase: is this about pot again?  I have no problem with you smoking pot.  We've talked about this before any number of times.  Have at it, and good for you.")

Listened to him deal effectively with a not particularly educated or articulate caller reporting a bigfoot sighting from decades before; Ian did a wonderful job of reassuring the caller that others putting him down for what he believed he had seen should not be his concern, only his own understanding of what he saw, told and re-told without embellishment, even "bonding" with the caller by saying he (Ian) had seen a UFO at one point, taken it through all official channels, never had it identified, and understood the caller's position that he *knew* what he had seen.  (Noory would have said something stupid like, "But was it a shadow person?  Was it a demon?")

The first hour of the interview--even better.  But I'll stop there.  I think folks who criticize Ian glom on to one or two moments where Ian does something not so great--and often forget the many, many things he does in a four-hour program that are spot on, starting with actually PREPARING FOR EACH SHOW. 

Gosh, I get tired of defending the man, but damn he's so much better than most of what we get.

[tmock00]

I think folks who criticize Ian glom on to one or two moments where Ian does something not so great--and often forget the many, many things he does in a four-hour program that are spot on, starting with actually PREPARING FOR EACH SHOW. 

Gosh, I get tired of defending the man, but damn he's so much better than most of what we get.

I 100% agree. 

I have always liked Ian, even back in the day when he was spinning rock 'n roll. He used to be a DJ here in my area in a studio just down the street, and back then he was known as Ian Case.  The radio station was 97x, and it was said to be haunted - and rightfully so, since it was located in a funeral home.

[999]

7/8/12

Ian Punnett welcomes medical intuitive and board certified psychiatrist, Dr. Judith Orloff, who'll discuss what messengers in our lives --in the form of angels, ghosts and dreams-- are trying to tell us. 

First Half-Hour: World champion Tandem surfer, Bear Woznick, talks about the relationship to surfing and his spirituality.

[onan]

In 2001, Second Sight was named in testimony before the United States Senate Special Committee on Aging as a prima facie example of "irresponsible unscientific work"

A work by orloff.

She is a quack.

[ziznak]

AH man!  Normally I look forward to his shows because his guests tend to be somewhat douche-free.  Don't think I'm going to check in for this one... in fact I don't think I've listened to anything in the last week or so.  The last thing I downloaded was a Wells show I have yet to scan through.

[ItsOver]

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. 

[HorrorReporter]

How long before Ian snags an interview with the former FBI agent that saw angels on 9/11? I say by September

[ItsOver]

Yeah, that's pretty bizarre.  Art would have been all over that.  Instead, we get "Shape Up America," courtesy of Saddam Snoory.  :

[Ben Shockley]

Judith Orloff coming up, huh?  I didn't hear her last time with Punnett and I won't be hearing this time.   I did offer some observations last time, last December, in another forum, and I offer them to you in hopes of causing a grin or two:

Looks like the Deacon wants to leave us with bad memories of his hosting, as he moves on to devote these 12 critical hours per month to saving his hearing.
Tonight Punnett will treat us to a double dose of feely-good, chirpy, airy-fairy-ness, and boy do I hate that crap.  This show looks to be one that Noory would have loved to do.

Scheduled first is Judith Orloff, who, in addition to passing herself off as a medical doctor (and I have trouble believing even that), would also have us believe that she is board certified as a "medical intuitive"  AND that these "credentials" self-evidently qualify her as a dream analyst, particularly with regard to how dreams predict the future.
Riiight...  This is the Admiral David Farragut school of charlatanry: "Damn the people with functioning brains, full speed after the rubes!!"
Second half: using hypnotherapy to achieve New Year's resolutions.  What Ian?, nothing about how to safely store leftovers or get along with visiting relatives during the holidays?  Well, I'm sure Georgie would be happy / relieved to squeeze in some "experts" on those during the frenetic first 15 minutes of a show next week....if he hasn't already.

You usually don't think of Ian doing the airy-fairy shows (much), but he makes up for that usual virtue by over-doucheing as follows:
Punnett will be arguing with people next week as they make their New Year predictions.  Count on it; he can't help it.
BUT, you can -- in the immortal words of Don Cornelius -- bet yo las' money that he won't argue one bit with Judith Orloff.  By god, you'd better already be peer-reviewed before you call him to make a prediction, but he WILL accept, a priori and unquestioningly, that there is such thing as "medical intuition" (and implicitly that it is a recognized field of certification) AND that dreams predict the future, AND that Orloff can do such interpretation.

...and it WON'T be a stone gas!

[HAL 9000]

Scheduled first is Judith Orloff, who, in addition to passing herself off as a medical doctor (and I have trouble believing even that), would also have us believe that she is board certified as a "medical intuitive"  AND that these "credentials" self-evidently qualify her as a dream analyst, particularly with regard to how dreams predict the future.
Riiight...

She is an MD... here is her medical license information - click to enlarge

[attachimg=1]

Not that this qualifies her for anything other than being a psychiatrist.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Ben Shockley]

Citing my hyperbolic  question as to whether Orloff really is an MD:

She is an MD... here is her medical license information - click to enlarge

Thank you HAL for clarifying a "question" whose answer either way was absolutely immaterial to the intended thrust (humor) of my post, other than in hopefully helping to establish the impression in the reader of a mood of "exasperated derision" on my part.
I suppose that faced with a joke that starts "a pirate walks into a bar with a parrot on his shoulder and asks to use the phone...," you would do some quick research and helpfully --but by god authoritatively-- interject that there is no evidence of any pirate carrying a parrot into any bar during the telephonic age!

Note to self: give up the efforts at humor, Shockley.  You're surrounded by painful hyper-literalists who refuse to take a joke (except from certain apparently-privileged posters) even when you pre-load the fact that you're joking throughout, like by expressing your "hopes of causing a grin or two."

[onan]

She is an MD... here is her medical license information - click to enlarge


Not that this qualifies her for anything other than being a psychiatrist.

Yeah, and her credentials seem noteworthy... until EFT. Yeah tapping meridians... that is some damn good therapy. She is a well educated huckster.

It is a real shame.

[HAL 9000]

Note to self: give up the efforts at humor, Shockley.  You're surrounded by painful hyper-literalists who refuse to take a joke (except from certain apparently-privileged posters) even when you pre-load the fact that you're joking throughout, like by expressing your "hopes of causing a grin or two."

Note to Shockley: don't take everything you read too seriously. I got the message of your post - posting her license info was just to show that, despite credentials, she too is A BIG FAT TURD.

Someone here recently, posted a disclaimer, warning people that their posts should be taken with a huge grain of Na+Cl-, so as not to be taken too seriously.

I had posted something similar years ago, as too many peeps were unable to see behind my dry (parched) humor.

When in doubt, choose pass the salt.

[Ben Shockley]

Note to Shockley: don't take everything you read too seriously. I got the message of your post - posting her license info was just to show that, despite credentials, she too is A BIG FAT TURD.

Okay HAL, we're cool.   But, an observation:
Citing (quoting) before a post implies (I would certainly suspect) to most people that what follows is in direct response to the post / poster cited and implicitly but quite logically, that you are putting your credibility up to either SUPPORT  or  CONTRADICT the person you cited.   When the new post offers information counter to that cited -- even, for example, if the new information seems to dismiss doubts (real or hyperbolic) raised by the citation-- it is logical to take it as a contradiction and an implicit challenge to the cited person's credibility (or mental stability or acumen, whatever).   It may not always be meant like that, but I'll bet that most people interpret it that way.   In other words --and as looney-bizarro as this might seem!-- posting what appears to be a dismissal of another person's post  just might not be taken by everyone as some sort of "dry humored" support of the sentiment conveyed in that cited post.   Go figure!?!

[ziznak]

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.

[Lovely Bones]

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. 

[Lovely Bones]

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. 

[WOTR]

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.

How sad is it that my first reaction to this was to do a quick search to discover how many more days you would be out of luck if you lived in the arctic?  For reference, if you were at the north pole you would have to rely exclusively on Hals posts for another 77 days to get you through (or 45 more days if you were in the mid arctic) as there is no sunset to cause a sunrise...
http://www.athropolis.com/sun-fr.htm

[b_dubb]

7/8/12

Ian Punnett welcomes medical intuitive and board certified psychiatrist, Dr. Judith Orloff, who'll discuss what messengers in our lives --in the form of angels, ghosts and dreams-- are trying to tell us. 

First Half-Hour: World champion Tandem surfer, Bear Woznick, talks about the relationship to surfing and his spirituality.

I could use an angel right now but not an angel with wings dipped in bullshit

[stevesh]

I think Ian was a much better C2C host when he worked every week. When he hosted the Saturday shows, he only had a week's worth of stuff that he had thought of or that had happened to him to interject into the show. Now, he has to cram a month's worth of self-absorption into four hours.

Last night's show was a good example. Granted, the guest wasn't much - the usual New Age blathering. But Ian spent way too much time talking about himself when she was on.

[Oversoul]

I think Ian was a much better C2C host when he worked every week. When he hosted the Saturday shows, he only had a week's worth of stuff that he had thought of or that had happened to him to interject into the show. Now, he has to cram a month's worth of self-absorption into four hours.

Last night's show was a good example. Granted, the guest wasn't much - the usual New Age blathering. But Ian spent way too much time talking about himself when she was on.

But isn't that typical of Ian Punnett and his propensity for theological or metaphysical excursions, pseudo-intellectual ruminations, and self-absorption?  He never strongly impressed me individually, as I always considered him part of The Three C2C Stooges: Noory, Knapp and Punnett, plus an occasional other one, Wells.   :

[PB the Deplorable]

But isn't that typical of Ian Punnett and his propensity for theological or metaphysical excursions, pseudo-intellectual ruminations, and self-absorption?  He never strongly impressed me individually, as I always considered him part of The Three C2C Stooges: Noory, Knapp and Punnett, plus an occasional other one, Wells.   :

Before I finally just gave up on the Deacon I noticed that the weekends when he did both shows, the Sunday show was usually much better (less annoying) - all the 8th grade humor, the big new words he had for us to learn, abusing the callers, making sure the guest knew how smart he was, it was as if he'd get it all out on the Saturday show then be an actual person the next night.

[VtaGeezer]

Oh, Ian...you're supposed to be the intellectual one.  But surfer zen and a shrink with an angel fetish?  And what's with the gushing over that pointless promo video of uberSurfer?  Punnett's status with C2C has slid to "You're getting this clown for a guest, so just STFU and cash the check".  Noory's mediocrity won.  C2C is now firmly set in New Age touchie-feelie drivel.

[Lone Gunman]

I really wish Ian would have been fired over the Steve Quayle flap years ago. Once in awhile, he has an out of the box guest that is tremendous (see: the Runestone episode) but for the most part he overtly avoids paranormal topics.

He's combatitive, annoying, thinks he's hilarious and liberally uses the word dude even though he's in his mid-50s. When he disagrees with a guest, he won't let it go and has a pathetically one-track mind. IP looooves to pick nits. And it shows.

Don't get a soft-rock morning show DJ for a paranormal show. Ever.

When he started out, at least tried to assimilate even though his belief system had him likely avoid the ghost and UFO topics.

More Knapp and John B. Wells, please.

[Oversoul]

I really wish Ian would have been fired over the Steve Quayle flap years ago. . . . for the most part he overtly avoids paranormal topics.

He's combatitive, annoying, thinks he's hilarious and liberally uses the word dude even though he's in his mid-50s. When he disagrees with a guest, he won't let it go and has a pathetically one-track mind. IP looooves to pick nits. And it shows. . . .

When he started out, at least tried to assimilate even though his belief system had him likely avoid the ghost and UFO topics.

I don't understand why Punnett lets his personal religious and/or moral beliefs as an Episcopalian Deacon get in the way of his hosting Coast To Coast.  The show is not a church pulpit or a radio Christian fundamentalist/evangelical program.  Why does he have to wear his Masters of Divinity seminary degree like a crown on his head (an observable syndrome common to afflicted Masters and doctorate degree holders)?  Can't he simply function as an impartial, objective and professional radio program host? 

. . . More Knapp and John B. Wells, please.

Please, please, not more of the other Stooges on C2C, particularly those two hams. 

[PB the Deplorable]

I don't understand why Punnett lets his personal religious and/or moral beliefs as an Episcopalian Deacon get in the way of his hosting Coast To Coast.  The show is not a church pulpit or a radio Christian fundamentalist/evangelical program.  Why does he have to wear his Masters of Divinity seminary degree like a crown on his head (an observable syndrome common to afflicted Masters and doctorate degree holders)?  Can't he simply function as an impartial, objective and professional radio program host? 


Please, please, not more of the other Stooges on C2C, particularly those two hams. 

The way he needs to always bring this up - as a way of letting us know how very educated he is, the way he needs to have everyone think he's just so smart, the way he treats people, the way he needs to be doing all the talking, I think Ian is extremely insecure.

[Oversoul]

The way he needs to always bring this up - as a way of letting us know how very educated he is, the way he needs to have everyone think he's just so smart, the way he treats people, the way he needs to be doing all the talking, I think Ian is extremely insecure.

I think you've hit the bull's eye.  He does project a smug "smart-ass kid" image, which came over the air waves particularly strong when he used to host C2C more frequently.

[Oversoul]

In the context of Ian Punnett being an active Episcopalian Deacon, does anyone here know or recall if Punnett favored same-sex marriages or, at the least, accepted homosexuality morally, theologically and societally?

I ask the question curiously in the light of the current news item "Episcopal bishops OK trial gay blessing prayer," carried today by:

AP [http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gB_rtzw1lgPEA2WxPhozFYOdhDFw?docId=2af91084840747ea9a2eb7853913e64e] and

The Washington Post [http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/episcopal-convention-affirms-ordination-transgendered-adopts-anti-discrimination-policy/2012/07/09/gJQA4So0YW_story.html].

Any info or recollection from Ian's show episodes at C2C or elsewhere publicly?

[HAL 9000]

In the context of Ian Punnett being an active Episcopalian Deacon, does anyone here know or recall if Punnett favored same-sex marriages or, at the least, accepted homosexuality morally, theologically and societally?

Any info or recollection from Ian's show episodes at C2C or elsewhere publicly?

One could infer something very slight by Ian's response to this picture taken at an Episcopalian conference (from his Twitter feed):

[attachimg=1]

Ian Punnett ‏@deaconpunnett: "Says so much."

My guess would be his personal and public opinions on this topic are at odds.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Oversoul]

My guess would be his personal and public opinions on this topic are at odds.

A conflicted man of the church, eh?  It would be interesting to hear him spill out his brains on the matter publicly, in case he hasn't yet.