Josh Cutchin – The Brimstone Deceit

brimstone-deceitFollowing on the heels of his groundbreaking A Trojan Feast (about food encountered in UFO and other paranormal experiences) Joshua Cutchin has recently released his second book The Brimstone Deceit.

We started off with a little shop talk about writing books and how great it is to see something you have been working on for so long finally show up in reality. Josh told me the funny story of how he came up with the title and we jumped into a discussion about smells and UFOs and other weirdness. He says that sulfur compounds are some of the easiest smells for the human nose to detect, which seems not entirely coincidental when it is traditionally connected with negative encounters and evil. The smell connects many seemingly disparate phenomena (such as UFOs and Bigfoot.) Something definitely wants to be noticed. He also mentioned the phenomenon of witnesses who have a strange encounter and carry around a weird odor for the rest of their lives.

The part of the show were taken up with gushing about the movie Arrival and what it might be like (the show was recorded a couple of months before release.)


This entry was posted in bigfoot, books, film, new research, UFOs. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Josh Cutchin – The Brimstone Deceit

  1. mfd says:

    I don’t know about “new age ufology,” but I consider you, Greg and Josh, and others, as being good representatives of, certainly, a “new wave of ufology.” The perspectives, and the work, you guys bring to the discussion is very refreshing and intellectually stimulating.

    I hear and read a lot of your stimulating ideas about how we should try different things, different approaches, but where are, to be blunt, the results of those different approaches? I keep hearing about the need to do things differently, and since I’m sure you’re not arguing we put all our eggs in the “new wave ufology” basket, what’s impeding the success of your approaches? Of your methodologies?

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for “new wave ufology” — I enjoy the ideas, I enjoy the discussions, like I said, they are very stimulating — but at this point I’m wondering what it all amounts to.

    I’m starting to wonder if, faced with the reality that whatever is out there that occasionally manifests or interacts with us is so far out of our reach (technologically, physiologically, etc) of our understanding and instruments, that all that is left for us to do is run away from the (fruitless) pursuit of the “objective” and into the comfort of the “subjective.”

    I promise I’m usually much more optimistic but times are hard, particularly after your country decides to commit suicide by voting for ignorance for president.

    • Greg says:


      Thank you for the compliments.

      I don’t think that there will be any results until we start to change our methodologies. In other words, people who are interested in this stuff have to start by throwing out all assumptions and concentrating on how witnesses are interviewed, how the human mind and nervous system processes input, what traumatic episodes do to our perceptions and memory, and even theories of reality like classical and quantum physics and information theory. I believe that we have to reassess how we think about things and model reality before we start to answer the question of what causes UFO sightings (which is a good question to start from anyway.) What I mean by that is the main questions should not be “where do UFOs come from” or “what do the aliens want,” rather the inquiry would be directed at the causes of the phenomenon, not what we think or assume it is. Some of the causes may lead right back to us.

      And as you mention the “comfort of the ‘subjective’,” I think that we may need to allow that much of the experience is subjective and that understanding may be harmed by forcing all of the witness testimony and data into an “objective” box.

      Sorry if all of that doesn’t sound very helpful as a definite pathway, but perhaps any rush for an “answer” is premature. We have to get our methodology straight before even apporaching any so-called answer. That’s why I also advocate that one of the goals should be a search for understanding of the issues as outlined above, rather than a search for some goal of solving the mystery as if it’s external to our perceptions, thought processes, and beliefs. If we reframe the debate, I’m pretty sure that the answers will come in time. It’s a slow process, maybe slower than most people can stand.

      P.S. I am starting to get the feeling of impending armageddon that I haven’t felt since I was a kid, and a need to be engaged politically (but never on this show!)

  2. John Randall says:

    Really enjoyed the the discussion of all things “smellable”Josh and Greg ! In some cases when some odors in events linger and don’t seem to go aways for weeks,could the initial triggering be rewiring the individual’s brain, so that even though the initial odor has dissipated, it’ll always “be there”, so much so that the person is actually recreating the smell themselves( to the point that others around them can small it as well)? ( if you’ve discussed this aspect already I apologize, as I’ve only listened once to the podcast and it take me 3 or 4 times to absorb it all). Looking forward to seeing” Arrival” . All the best.

  3. Peter says:

    My favourite ufo documentary was “In advance of the Landing” (1993), apparently based on a book. About half an hour is on YouTube.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *