Credible Art guests (and hello)

[Renton]

This is the perfect lead-in to what I was going to suggest.  Who is or is not credible depends 100% on what your beliefs are.  If you believe in UFO's and honestly think you have been abducted Whitley may well be "credible."  If you believe in ghosts and the afterlife the GIS may be your thing.  Believe in voodo, curses and the occult?  Evelyn was your woman.

The thing is that Art was good at allowing us to suspend disbelief; even if it were just for awhile.  I do not believe that we have been visited by little green men from mars- but I would listen to MOST of his shows (though there were some that just got to be too much.)  However, I would consider precious few guest as having "been onto something."  Now, if I did believe in them already, maybe Hoagland is onto something with his photographic proof and moon bases?

Your disbelieving Malachi Martin based on your disbelief of his beliefs (wow, does that even make sense?) demonstrates how the question of which guest is credible reflects more on the poster who answers than the guest themselves.

I see where you are going with this and think you make great points. But, it's also worth pointing out that listeners can have an interest in the subject matter and suspend disbelief without viewing the guest as credible. The notion of "suspending disbelief" comes from fiction (plays, books, films, etc). You can watch a film and know it's a work of fiction but still be affected by it (e.g. you can still be scared by a horror movie), ergo reinforcing the suspension of disbelief.  I'm an atheist with more degrees than most of Art's guests, but I still prefer listening to supernatural-themed shows more than most other shows.

On a related matter, I don't understanding how Malachi Martin graduated with 3 doctorates and a masters degree in 4 years, when Belgium require 3 years of study minimum per doctorate. Perhaps he studied at a time when requirements were not as strict.

[Mr. Fidget]

So folks, which do you think are the most credible guests over the years?  Who may have been on to something?

May 9, 1997 - Art Bell w/ Willie Nelson. Although he was not "on to" something, he may very well have been on something. That was years before I got to send a monogrammed Linkey Fidget his way, and a few months before my own show(s) with Art.
   I'm not sure the collective "Bellgab mental wellbeing" could handle my potentially valid assertion that indeed, I had a great deal of "credibility." So I shall barely resist the temptation to make such "bold and outrageous" claims. Welcome.

mf

[ks3484]

...

I'm not sure the collective ...
...

mf

Hmmmm...As I look back at the Art Bell phenom of yesteryear; I wonder if I should look on the Bell-aires or Bellers as a collective or as a congregation?

[henge0stone]

I feel like a good portion of guests were creditable . Certainly a lot of guests, Friedman, Lear, Davenport, Howe and other people looking into Paranormal phenomenon.

I also think people doing research were creditable, that doesn't necessarily mean they are 100 % right.   A good example would be John Rhodes. They look into ancient mysteries and did a lot of research. Does that mean that, like rhodes says, that there a lizard people? Not really but he found links between them and the UFO phenomenon. Anyone seriously researching things I think is credible because no matter how crazy their ideas they are investigating the unknown so its hard to discredit them. Hoagland does not fit into this category because looking at pictures and saying all other facts are hidden by NASA is not research.

Thats not saying that there weren't the crazy people who were 99.99-100 % fake like the witches, time travelers, Mel, abductees which insanely complex stories. Pamela the lady who had sex with a lizard alien comes to mind. Not to mention Dallas thompson.